alexmv at bestpractical.com
Mon Nov 24 12:08:04 EST 2014
On 11/21/2014 05:21 AM, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:46:16AM +0100, Christian Loos wrote:
>> Am 21.11.2014 um 09:46 schrieb Emmanuel Lacour:
>>> who is going to like using numerical identifiers in configuration?
>> Me! ;-)
>> Currently changing a CF name used in CustomFieldGroupings is a 2 step
>> * change CF name in the WebUI
>> * change CustomFieldGroupings in RT_SiteConfig.pm
>> As this are total different places this may lead that the latter one
>> will be forgotten.
> I agree, thought, you can mind of changing a grouping also needs now to
> steps, a first one to find the ID of the CF.
> But seriously, I think that BPS will agree to stay with name as this is
> more consistent, think about other configuration variables, they all use
> object names, not id ... fortunatly.
Making the configuration take either name or ID should be relatively
straightforward, and I don't see any obvious drawbacks to doing so.
>> Great. Can someone add me to ticket #30489.
> I added you as a Cc on this ticket.
The biggest complexity to per-queue grouping configuration is the
configuration itself; it cries out more for a web-based configuration UI
More information about the rt-devel