Changes between Version 11 and Version 12 of WorkFlow

Timestamp:

Jan 27, 2006, 6:47:10 PM (18 years ago)

Author:

Christian Boos

Comment:

I hope you don't mind a little refactoring, as I find striked-through text very hard to read…

WorkFlow

@@ -4 +4 @@
 
 == Tasks ==
+=== Done ===
+ * Add a `disabled` attribute to fields so that workflow hooks can disable fields but still leave them visible.
+ * Add a `hidden` attribute for the same reason. I've actually already done this, simply by renaming the `skip` attribute to `hidden`. Did this to be more consistent with HTML.
+ * Add a `fullrow` attribute which signifies that the form element will span both columns of the ticket property fieldset. eg. summary, type, description and reporter would all be `fullrow=1` (done, but code in the templates is not implemented). [2833]
+ * Remove code specific to individual fields from ticket.cs/newticket.cs. The summary, type, description and reporter would be converted to use the the same generic code as the rest of the fields. [2833]
+ * Remove large `if/elif` statement from ticket.cs/newticket.cs. Currently there is a large if/then/else style block which is used to display all fields other than the four described above. This could be removed and replaced with a call to form_control(). [2833]
+ * In order to specify the order the generic field display code would use, the above changes would probably require the ticket.fields.* HDF branch to be changed to an array (currently it is a dict). This change would be in api.py (return fields in the correct display order) and the .cs files, possibly elsewhere. [2832].
+ * If possible I would also like to factor out the ticket field display/edit code from both ticket.cs and newticket.cs into ticket_fields.cs, as the template code is basically functionally identical. [2833]
+ * Need a clean way to differentiate between fields that should not be displayed in the summary and those that should not be displayed at all. eg. `summary` should be hidden in the ticket summary (as it is used for the title), and should only be editable by users with `TICKET_ADMIN` privileges. Perhaps the logic should be that if a field is `hidden` it is not displayed anywhere, unless it is also `editable`, in which case it is only displayed in the ticket properties. [2837]
 
- * ~~Add a `disabled` attribute to fields so that workflow hooks can disable fields but still leave them visible.~~
- * ~~Add a `hidden` attribute for the same reason. I've actually already done this, simply by renaming the `skip` attribute to `hidden`. Did this to be more consistent with HTML.~~
- * ~~Add a `fullrow` attribute which signifies that the form element will span both columns of the ticket property fieldset. eg. summary, type, description and reporter would all be `fullrow=1` (done, but code in the templates is not implemented).~~ [2833]
- * ~~Remove code specific to individual fields from ticket.cs/newticket.cs. The summary, type, description and reporter would be converted to use the the same generic code as the rest of the fields.~~ [2833]
- * ~~Remove large `if/elif` statement from ticket.cs/newticket.cs. Currently there is a large if/then/else style block which is used to display all fields other than the four described above. This could be removed and replaced with a call to form_control().~~ [2833]
- * ~~In order to specify the order the generic field display code would use, the above changes would probably require the ticket.fields.* HDF branch to be changed to an array (currently it is a dict). This change would be in api.py (return fields in the correct display order) and the .cs files, possibly elsewhere.~~ [2832].
- * ~~If possible I would also like to factor out the ticket field display/edit code from both ticket.cs and newticket.cs into ticket_fields.cs, as the template code is basically functionally identical.~~ [2833]
+=== TODO ===
  * Add a `.onchange` option for javascript field validation.
  * Add a `.title` option, or maybe `.tooltip`, though I think for the sake of consisteny it should be `.title`.
  * Add a `checkboxes` field type. This differs from the `checkbox` type in that it is a set of related checkboxes. It would store the data in the field value as `check1|check2|check4`. I'm not sure about this one, or how it would be presented in the query module, but I figured that people might find it useful. Similarly, a `multi_select` type could be useful.
  * Remove `ticket_custom_props()` macro? It does not appear to be referenced.
- * ~~Need a clean way to differentiate between fields that should not be displayed in the summary and those that should not be displayed at all. eg. `summary` should be hidden in the ticket summary (as it is used for the title), and should only be editable by users with `TICKET_ADMIN` privileges. Perhaps the logic should be that if a field is `hidden` it is not displayed anywhere, unless it is also `editable`, in which case it is only displayed in the ticket properties.~~ [2837]
  * There are a number of locations in the ticket code where permissions are hard coded. As an example, the `TICKET_CREATE` permission is required to create a new ticket. Should this be overridable by `ITicketWorkflow` implementors?