On Jan 7, 2:02 am, jevans <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 5:27 pm, Greg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I'm a potential future user of Trac, currently using Bugzilla, and I
> > have a question about Trac's workflow customization.
>
> > My company currently tracks bugs and features.  While I like the idea
> > of considering both bugs and features as subsets of a single "issue"
> > concept, we need to use different terminology for the two.  For
> > instance, bugs would have states like "reported", "confirmed",
> > "assigned", "fixed", and "closed", while features would have states
> > like "requested", "approved", "assigned", "completed", "tested", and
> > "merged".  The reason for the distinction is partly to avoid confusing
> > our staff, and partly for regulatory compliance.
>
> > Would I be able to configure a single installation of Trac to handle
> > these two different workflows, or would I be better off to install
> > Trac twice?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Greg
>
> Speculation:
> Perhaps the TicketCreationStatus plug-in (<http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/
> TicketCreationStatusPlugin>) could be extended to support setting the
> initial state based on ticket type.  Or it might be useful as a
> starting point for a separate plug-in that does it.  I think setting
> up separate workflows from there would be pretty straight-forward.
> Good luck,
> - jevans

Yes, this can be done.  You will want to take a look at the
TypedTicketWorkflow plugin (this the key for what you want to do, and
pretty awesome, but can be unwieldy at first) and possibly also the
TicketValidator plugin.  I don't use the TicketCreationStatus plugin,
but it is worth a look in addtion, if you want that sort of feature.
you may also consider the TicketExtPlugin which can fill in some
fields/description based on ticket type.  We also use the
AdvancedWorkflowPlugin to reassing/change state/resoultion on certain
transitions (such as set_owner_to_previous, same for state, etc.) as
well as limit what permissions are required to do certain actions

Anway, as an example, with the first 2 I mentioned, we do the
following:
we have a Feature Branch type, which has the resolutions of only:
merged, abandoned
it also has the work flow stages:
Ready for code Review
Code Review Accepted (which is the only step, in our model, that can
transition to merged)

a task ticket, has the resolution of completed instead of "fixed", and
also most of the others are gone.  "canceled" is another resolution
for a task
a test ticket, has completed, pass, fail, canceled

the validator is used for a few states, for example, to assign a
ticket, a Due date is required
to accept a ticket, an estimate time is required
and to "send to QA" the how to verify section is required.

Yes, this can be done.

I recommend the following:

map out your intended workflow.

additionally give TICKET_ADMIN rights to move *->new (reopen), and/or
install the batch modify plugin.

when I did this, no matter how well we nailed down the workflow, we
ended up with some transitions never thought of:

(for example, we only expected our "Ready for code review" stage to
ever transition to "review accepted" or back to "previous state/
owner" (reject set it back to "accepted or assigned or new...etc. as
appropriate" or "abandoned, which is an axed feature). Turns out the
"needInfo" state actually applied once.  I used BatchModify to set it
directly, but then added the transition option for future use.

our workflow is quite complicated, and it was implementable.  the
custom-workflow section is huge though.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac 
Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to