Re: The impending end of FC2 NEEDINFO bugs...

[Dave Lawrence <dkl redhat com>]

Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:

> On Thu, 26 May 2005, Mike A. Harris wrote:
>
>  
>
> > I disagree.  There are different ways to say the same thing, and
> > while "WONTFIX" is very much true, it is NOT the best way of saying
> > it.  Or should I say instead - There are better ways of saying
> > "WONTFIX" that are more positive and friendly.
> >
> > One could argue GO_TO_HELL is a "true" resolution for some bugs,
> > but is it "friendly"?  Is it "proactive"?  Does it give the
> > reporter a warm feeling in their stomach?
> >
> > No.
> >    
>
> Hey Dave Lawrence...
>
> Is there a way to add certain text to certain bugzilla emails, depending 
> on the presence of particular state data?
>
> As in, if "WONTFIX" is present, some text that explains what "WONTFIX" 
> means in more positive terms?
>
> --g
>
> _____________________  ____________________________________________
>  Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
> Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent.  the
>             Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the 
>                     ] [ dumb.  --mcluhan
>      Red Hat Summit ] [
>         New Orleans ] [ Learn. Network. Experience Open Source.
>     June 1/2/3 2005 ] [ (And Make Your Boss Pay For It.) 
>                       [ http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/
>
>  

Not without hacking the BZ code with some If/Else conditions. We could 
change the help text on the page that explains each of the resolutions 
to be more friendly and place a link to that page in each of the emails 
that go out if a status change is made.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/page.cgi?id=bug_status.html

Dave


--
-------------------------------
David Lawrence <dkl redhat com>
  Red Hat Quality Assurance
-------------------------------
www.redhat.com   ftp.redhat.com