[rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit syntaxinconsistencies

Philip Kime pkime at Shopzilla.com
Thu Jun 22 17:12:20 EDT 2006


You could deal with both on input but you'd need to pass a flag back and
forth to keep track of which format you wanted on output and I don't
think that would be be very pretty. As long as the "rt help" stuff
mentions the format, I would think it would be ok. The "rt
search|list|ls" help does say that the format is the SQL-like syntax
(TicketSQL) that RT uses - as long as the "show" and "edit" help said
"CFs have prefix CF-" or something?

The change to CF.{} for REST CFs wouldn't be hard to code but I'm just
not sure that propagating a tricky syntax even further would be such a
good idea? It's possible (and easier) to modify the REST search function
to allow "CF-" as well as CF.{}. What about that?

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Joshua Colson [mailto:jcolson at voidgate.org] 
Sent: 22 June 2006 12:56
To: Philip Kime; Jesse Vincent
Cc: rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Custom Fields query vs. CLI edit
syntaxinconsistencies

What if the CLI supported both versions of the syntax? Would that make
the REST code more difficult to maintain?




More information about the rt-users mailing list