Hi Debasis, Perhaps Uditha could help with this work to identify the minimum set of changes (a new patch) that are needed to support status changes in Scmbug 0.26.16 for Bugzilla 3.4.
On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 19:52 +0530, Debasis Mishra wrote: > Hi Kristis, > Thanks .comments are getting reflected in bugzilla but status is not > getting changed. OK, this confirms that you are experiencing the expected behavior. Scmbug 0.26.16 was supposed to have comments properly reflected but not support status changes. > I went through the patch code.i am confused. > because the whole subroutines/functions are not provided.only few > lines of the subroutines is given which is confusing. The patch could be applied using the 'patch' utility. e.g. $ patch --dry-run -p0 < Bugzilla.pm.patch # and if there are no errors, remove "--dry-run": $ patch -p0 < Bugzilla.pm.patch # If there are errors, a Bugzilla.pm.rej file would be produced It is not possible to provide the complete Bugzilla.pm file. First, the Bugzilla.pm file changed for Scmbug 0.26.16 (from 0.26.15), hence we would be supplying you with the wrong file. Second, the patch indicates everything necessary to apply this change. If the patch does not apply cleanly, then this means considerable changes to Bugzilla.pm were applied that make this patch incompatible for use with Scmbug 0.26.16. You would need to manually examine the changes, understand them and integrate them appropriately (this could be hard to do). Having a patch, instead of a separate Bugzilla.pm file, is a good thing: it protects you from using a (possibly incorrect) Bugzilla.pm file from a different version of Scmbug. I am **sure** that parts of this patch are incorrect and would not apply cleanly since detecting Bugzilla version 3.0 and 3.2 is implemented with new routines. It also seems that Uditha had provided a .pm file at some point: http://bugzilla.mkgnu.net/attachment.cgi?id=422 ...but if I were you I would not use it. From what I understand, the logic needed to support status changes shows up at the end of the patch, starting from: - $dbh->bz_unlock_tables(); ... # It starts here + $bug->set_status( $status, { resolution => $resolution } ); + + # $dbh->bz_start_transaction(); ... > 1.sub bug_status_map > 2.sub integration_change_bug_resolution > Can anybody please provide me the bugzilla.pm file where the status > change is being implemented.then i can try to make it work on bugzilla > 3.4.1.or else the full subroutine which is changed is also fine. > > Thanks, > Debasis > > > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Kristis Makris <[email protected]> > wrote: > Well... status changes for Bugzilla 3.4 (or 3.2) are not > supported :) > > http://www.mkgnu.net/node/177 > > There was some work by Uditha on supporting status changes for > Bugzilla > 3.2, which you may be able to clean-up and reuse. It hadn't > been merged > because it was breaking status changes for Bugzilla 3.0. > > http://bugzilla.mkgnu.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1246 > > > On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 13:48 +0530, Debasis Mishra wrote: > > Hi Kristis, > > Thanks a lot for your reply.I tried with the patch for the > version > > 3.4.1. > > my postcommit hook is not failing and i am able to commit. > > > > But I am unable to see any difference in bugzilla.there is > no change > > in the status. > > I was expecting the status should be changed from assigned > to > > resolved.and the comment what i had given during the comment > should be > > included.I am not sure this was my expectation. > > > Are the comments you enter showing up if no status changes are > specified ? >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ scmbug-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mkgnu.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scmbug-users
