[whups] bug

[Alex L]

Quoting Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org>:

[snip]

> Well, we need at some point to make it possible to get the email of a horde
> 
> user, and the point of the framework is to provide components - if Horde
> users 
> don't work for whups, well, we should probably fix Horde users.
> 

I think that we can make it flexible without too much work. I believe there 
should be a choice between whether whups uses whups-local users for assigning 
tickets, horde-users for whups assigning, or both (via appending 
custom_user_table >> horde-users)? This would be fairly simple to implement and 
can easily be added as a setup in the config file. A little more to think about 
is that yes, while whups is a component of horde, it's also not a calendar or 
task manager, it's a public ticket system shared between users rather than 
privately maintained by an individual. So it may be approriate to use localized 
(or a choice thereof) users for whups.

> However, we do need to account for things like public bug systems, where
> anyone 
> can report a bug. Maybe something like php.net's leave your email address and
> a 
> password for editing this bug would work.

That does sound great. We don't necessary have to blindly copy php :) We could 
use a word like 'Originator' or something like that instead of 'From'. 'From' 
sounds too email-ish imo.

more thoughts:
I think that it would be good to setup a specific framework for the designation 
of 'internal' vs 'public' tickets. eg, a ticket property (sql), whether visible 
to users or not (to save landscape) that specifies whether a ticket was created 
internally or publicly. This would further provide the ability to do some 
reports on tickets and such.

All the above framework would seperate the 'Originator' completely from who the 
assignee. While they still may both be the same, the assignee can change, but 
the originator will still be notified of changes (originator can't change). 
Secondly, the 'assignee' can be added or removed from the system by preference 
if the 'user' shtuff I mentioned above would be implemented.

Thoughts and comments?

-Alex

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/