milestone could be a ticket

[ThurnerRupert]

can milestones be implemented as tickets too, just by marking a ticket as milestone? a milestone can depend on other milestones, they can be in parallel, they have a responsible, they have an importance, and they depend on the completion of tickets.

currently the milestone concept has a few weaknesses:

• changes are not tracked
• no responsible
• no dependencies (or just implicit by setting dates)
• consolidated view over multiple trac instances, i.e. have a big milestone consisting of small ones stored in other trac instances.

mark a ticket as a milestone, intertrac, and ticket dependencies would solve 95% of these issues. do you see any disadvantage in doing this?

[cboos]

You may want to have a look at SubTickets, which is a special case
for the general TracObjectModelProposal approach, and discusses what
could be put in common between tickets and milestones.

[cboos]

Long term topic.

[eblot]

#6594 has been marked as a duplicate.

[Haipisporah]

Hi People
How are you doing?

[cboos]

Milestone 2.0 deleted

[cboos]

Strange, "tiger_seed" was not part of the content submitted to the SpamFilter.

[dstoecker]

Fixed in r10541.

[cboos]

Great! Thanks, all 0.12 and 0.13 instances were upgraded.

[cboos]

(so long, tiger_seed ;-) )

[rblank]

Mmh... Comment numbering seems to be thoroughly fscked up here. I wonder how we managed to get comment:2 after comment:8...

[cboos]

Definitely a ticket full of interesting [OT] issues ;-)

The second comment:2 was created by a batch modification at the occasion of the deletion of the temporary triaging milestone. That looks like the culprit.

[cboos]

Same story on #4583 (also the same two consecutive milestone deletion there), but on #7342 it's fine, and there has been one change between those two milestone deletion.

[rblank]

OT: I'm currently in the process of fixing all those comment numbering issues by hand in the database. I have tried reproducing the issue with current 0.12-stable, but wasn't able to. My guess is that the milestone deletion was done at a point where we still had issues with comment numbering (#8947), but the timing doesn't seem right. If anyone can find a reliable way to reproduce the issue, I'm interested.