Uploaded image for project: 'Other'
  1. Other
  2. OTHER-294

Can no longer edit fields on closed INST tickets

    • Icon: Bug Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Icon: Normal Normal
    • Jira
    • None

      chatlog: https://chatlogs.metabrainz.org/brainzbot/metabrainz/msg/3880545/

      I believe this also applies to comments I make on any INST ticket as well - I can edit comments and fields on other project's tickets just fine (eg PICARD-972)

          [OTHER-294] Can no longer edit fields on closed INST tickets

          Figured out I can just remove the editable = false flag from the Closed step of the classic workflow instead, so I did that. Seems to have worked - as far as I can tell there wasn't anything where we very specifically didn't want people to be able to edit closed tickets, so. If we don't want this for all the stuff in the classic workflow, I can always add a new workflow for INST instead, but that's slightly more effort (like, five minutes).

          Nicolás Tamargo added a comment - Figured out I can just remove the editable = false flag from the Closed step of the classic workflow instead, so I did that. Seems to have worked - as far as I can tell there wasn't anything where we very specifically didn't want people to be able to edit closed tickets, so. If we don't want this for all the stuff in the classic workflow, I can always add a new workflow for INST instead, but that's slightly more effort (like, five minutes).

          Took a quick look, and I think that's because INST (like AREQ, LB and a few others) uses the "classic" workflow scheme, while PICARD, MBS, etc use the (more powerful, it seems) MusicBrainz workflow. Changing INST and the others to the MB workflow probably will fix this, but also add stuff like "in beta testing" and "in development branch" to them. I guess we could just do that and ignore those extra steps, up to @Freso

          Nicolás Tamargo added a comment - Took a quick look, and I think that's because INST (like AREQ, LB and a few others) uses the "classic" workflow scheme, while PICARD, MBS, etc use the (more powerful, it seems) MusicBrainz workflow. Changing INST and the others to the MB workflow probably will fix this, but also add stuff like "in beta testing" and "in development branch" to them. I guess we could just do that and ignore those extra steps, up to @Freso

            reosarevok Nicolás Tamargo
            ApekattQuest, MonkeyPython MonkeyPython
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

                Version Package