On 06/14/2012 04:40 PM, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote:
Jiri Moskovcak <[email protected]> writes:
On 06/14/2012 04:00 PM, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote:
to make bugs private, it must be placed in groups. Name of groups
is not possible fetch via xmlrpc query against bugzilla server.
That means, that everyone must "magically" know the name of group.
And things can go even worst. E.g. if you want to place bug in group
Red Hat Development (internal), it won't be work like that
reporter-bugzilla -g "Red Hat Development (internal)"
because it's not the name of group. Digging into
bugzilla.redhat.com/<some-bug-id> I found
<input type="hidden" name="defined_groups" value="devel">
<input type="checkbox" value="devel" name="groups" id="group_12">
<label for="group_12">Red Hat Development (internal)</label>
<input type="hidden" name="defined_groups" value="redhat">
<input type="checkbox" value="redhat" name="groups" id="group_161">
<label for="group_161">Red Hat Employee (internal)</label>
that means, corrent name for 'Red Hat Development (internal)' is 'devel',
and corrent name for 'Red Hat Employee (internal)' is 'redhat' - tough cookies.
Signed-off-by: Nikola Pajkovsky <[email protected]>
---
doc/reporter-bugzilla.txt | 5 +++-
src/plugins/reporter-bugzilla.c | 6 +++--
src/plugins/rhbz.c | 57
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
src/plugins/rhbz.h | 2 +-
4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/reporter-bugzilla.txt b/doc/reporter-bugzilla.txt
index 94216ae..1d6af43 100644
--- a/doc/reporter-bugzilla.txt
+++ b/doc/reporter-bugzilla.txt
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ reporter-bugzilla - Reports problem to Bugzilla.
SYNOPSIS
--------
-'reporter-bugzilla' [-vbf] [-c CONFFILE] -d DIR
+'reporter-bugzilla' [-vbf] [-g|--group GROUP-NAME]... [-c CONFFILE] -d DIR
Or:
@@ -85,6 +85,9 @@ OPTIONS
-h::
--duphash::
Search in bugzilla by abrt's DUPHASH and return BUG-ID
+-g::
+--group GROUP-NAME::
+ When creating bug, add bug in given group
- "When creating a new ticket restrict access to the defined groups only"
ech,
- I would use: "Restrict access to this groups only" ^^^^
better
+ for (GList *l = group; l; l = l->next)
+ {
- nitpick: can be done with g_list_foreach()
problem with g_list_foreach() is that you have to provide (*gfunc)
callback for 'foreach', which I don't see as better solution. It brings
more line in the code and definitely not more readability
- missing testsuite, the rest seems ok
testsuite must be in abrt.git
- yes, but someone has to write it first :)
