Ticket #6328 (closed enhancement: duplicate)
Opened 4 years ago
Last modified 4 years ago
Ticket not yet specified
| Reported by: | daniel.oconnor@… | Owned by: | jonas |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ticket system | Version: | |
| Severity: | minor | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | |||
| Release Notes: | |||
| API Changes: | |||
Description
Scenario:
I'm coverting a business requirements document from management-speak to something developers can handle.
There are a lot of terse, tangled requirements, like "Add a postbox to the front lawn of the house"; which implies that we've built a Lawn, House, put the Lawn at the Front of the House, built a Postbox, and we're now ready to place it.
I only want to ticket one issue, place-the-postbox.
Current workflow:
- Create original meta-ticket (all requirements)
- Flesh out subticket (make a lawn)
- Link to subticket on master ticket
- Link to master ticket on subticket
- Rinse & Repeat (make a house, place lawn infront of house, etc etc)
Proposed:
- A macro/page processor which allows you to defer documenting tickets until later - it creates 'stubs'
IE:
- You do a several "ticket:new" macros on the master ticket
- When you save
- new blank tickets are created ("title=To Be Described")
- the ticket:new are replaced with the actual ticket number
- Each new ticket has a link back to the master
- All you do now is click through and edit the subtickets
Attachments
Change History
comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by sid
comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by daniel.oconnor@…
- Resolution set to duplicate
- Status changed from new to closed
Yeah, it's a dupe of http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/SubTickets too



#886 addresses the master ticket concept, and although I think your idea is an interesting one, the approach addresses the root problem from the side. #886 seems to address the real problem. I propose closing as a duplicate of that ticket, and I encourage you to join in the discussion on #886.