Mr. Meitar Moscovitz wrote:
> On Aug 25, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> 
>>> I'm not saying that this feature wouldn't "be nice to have," because
>>> sure, that'd be a nice option. As you mentioned, however, Trac
>>> currently doesn't do this, which is obviously only a problem for  
>>> those
>>> people who want that feature *right now* (hence the existence of
>>> MasterTicketsPlugin, I assume).
>> Um, Trac does support it, you just install the plugin. If such a  
>> plugin
>> didn't already exist I could see the argument for doing this with
>> keywords, but the hard part has already been done.
>>
>> --Noah
> 
> Okay, now I'm confused. Maybe even after your explanation I don't  
> understand the MasterTicketsPlugin. After all, I've never used it. Its  
> page on trac-hacks.org says:
> 
> "This plugin adds "blocks" and "blocked by" fields to each ticket,  
> enabling you to express dependencies between tickets."
> 
> As I explained earlier, this *isn't* what I want.

The plugin can be thought of has having two conceptual components (the
code is fairly distinct internally too): One is a system to take two
fields (called blocking and blockedby, but the labels can be set to
anything for all I care) and setup bi-directional links so that the
correctly update on the other side after a change, including copying
over the comment, formatting the UI nicely, etc etc. The second is a
system that uses those relations to prevent you from closing a ticket
with open blockers. You can use the first part without the second.
Perhaps this wasn't clear initially.

> Sure, and that's where I come back to the point about communication.
> To me, projects seem to go smoother when the responsibility lies with
> the so-called "blocked-by" dev rather than the "blocking" dev (for
> real "blocking items" anyway).

I prefer neither, I would rather the system handle it. Much less likely
forget to mention things, or get confused, or say "ticket 121" when you
mean "ticket 212", etc etc. This is a purely mechanical thing, so I
prefer to let the machine handle it.

I understand what you are suggesting, and I am countering that you are
actually making life much harder for your fellow developers than it has
to be.

--Noah

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to