Vote #72150
完了Issue-class: status-1, status-2 etc. refer to status position instead of status id
0%
説明
There are additional classes in the html code for issues, like the one for status. But the number is generated by position instead of id. I'd think intended behavior would be to generate those by id.
Steps for reproduction:
Add a theme/css with status color coding, e.g.:
/* use MantisBT style coloring by status */
table.issues tr.status-1 { background: #fcc; } /* new */
table.issues tr.status-2 { background: #cdf; } /* assigned / in progress */
table.issues tr.status-3 { background: #dfd; } /* resolved */
table.issues tr.status-4 { background: #fdf; } /* feedback */
table.issues tr.status-5 { background: #eee; } /* closed */
table.issues tr.status-6 { background: #fd6; } /* rejected */
Add a new ticket status and move it's position to No.1 - all colors would be mixed up.
Additional thoughts:
If this is intended (didn't find any documentation) it might be needed for some JavaScript sorting, however even in that case it would be better to have a more distinguished name or supply both (like @status-1@ and @statusid-3@ or something similar).
journals
Looks like it's the same as #2071?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, that ticket didn't came up in my searches.
The concept behind the issue is the same, however this one refers to *status* instead of *priority*. IMHO this is a little bit more serious with status, because status refers to an nominal scale and priority refers to an ordinal scale.
But I agree that a simple workaround is to use priority=ID so that it has low severity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change done in r10078.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Philippe Lang wrote:
> Change done in r10078.
I've just run into the same issue. Had a look at r10078 and wonder if @priority@ does not have the same issue?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michel Albert wrote:
> [...] Had a look at r10078 and wonder if @priority@ does not have the same issue?
It had and it was fixed in a similar way in r10079 for #2071 (note that the commit message contains a typo; read: priority-{id} instead of status-{id}).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------