Re: [rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit syntax inconsistencies
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 12:31 -0700, Philip Kime wrote: > I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing - the REST syntax for CF > editing is nice and simple for scripting - the curly brackets would make > things more complicated to parse and generally use. When I was deciding > on a format for displaying CFs for the AT REST code, I automatically > chose "CF_" (changed to "CF-" now to match RT 3.6.0) because it's easy > to parse in the REST code and easy to edit in the CLI. All that shell > escaping for curly brackets when you're scripting would make the REST > interface less convenient to use ... What if the CLI supported both versions of the syntax? Would that make the REST code more difficult to maintain? I agree that the lack of curly brackets makes scripting cleaner but I spend a few hours hitting my head against the wall to discover that difference (in the beginning). Maybe this should be moved to the -devel list. -- Joshua Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html
[rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit syntax inconsistencies
> Why don't they both use the same syntax for referencing custom fields? I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing - the REST syntax for CF editing is nice and simple for scripting - the curly brackets would make things more complicated to parse and generally use. When I was deciding on a format for displaying CFs for the AT REST code, I automatically chose "CF_" (changed to "CF-" now to match RT 3.6.0) because it's easy to parse in the REST code and easy to edit in the CLI. All that shell escaping for curly brackets when you're scripting would make the REST interface less convenient to use ... PK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html
Re: [rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit syntax inconsistencies
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 11:52:00AM -0700, Joshua Colson wrote: > Does anyone know why the syntax of a query on a custom field from the > command line looks like: > > rt ls "Queue='General' AND CF.{SomeDefinedCustomField} is not 'NULL'" > > ... but the edit would be something like: > > rt edit ticket/1 add CF-SomeDefinedCustomField='Value' > > Why don't they both use the same syntax for referencing custom fields? Mostly because the functionality came from different places at different times. The query builder version is the preferred format and I'd love a patch to the CLI to support that version. Best, Jesse > Thanks. > > -- > Joshua Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ___ > http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users > > Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com > Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. > Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com > > > We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: > http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html > -- ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html
[rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit syntax inconsistencies
Does anyone know why the syntax of a query on a custom field from the command line looks like: rt ls "Queue='General' AND CF.{SomeDefinedCustomField} is not 'NULL'" ... but the edit would be something like: rt edit ticket/1 add CF-SomeDefinedCustomField='Value' Why don't they both use the same syntax for referencing custom fields? Thanks. -- Joshua Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html