From: Steven G. <st...@gr...> - 2002-01-04 10:26:10
Attachments:
core_email_API.diff
|
Here is a trivial patch to core_email_API.php made against version 1.24 using cvs diff. It allows you to specify $t_recipient to be null in case you don't want messages to be sent to an archive or mailing list. To use this feature you also need a version of PhpMailer from 19th December 2001 or later, which contains a patch that I added that allows mails to be sent without a to: field as long as they have cc or bcc entries. I don't know what the project policy on doing commits is... as I am new to the mantisbt project I thought it best to send the patch here instead of commiting it to CVS. - Steven. |
From: Leonardo A. M. <leo...@mo...> - 2002-02-07 20:20:06
|
Hello all, I have had some trouble trying to install mantis 0.17.0, but in the end I found some bug I would like to share with you. I've just begun running it a couple of days ago. I won't release it as patches because I reindented all my files for debugging purposes. I realized that if you are not placing the scripts in your document root it will fail in this snippet: proj_doc_page.php extract( $row, EXTR_PREFIX_ALL, "v" ); $v_diskfile = str_replace( $DOCUMENT_ROOT, "", $v_diskfile ); $v_filesize = round( $v_filesize / 1024 ); I would suggest: extract( $row, EXTR_PREFIX_ALL, "v" ); $v_diskfile = str_replace( $g_absolute_path, "", $v_diskfile ); $v_filesize = round( $v_filesize / 1024 ); the same problem happens in the files: view_bug_advanced_page.php, view_bug_page.php in bug_file_add.php there is a break missing in the switch statement between DISK and DATABASE. This bug also happens in proj_doc_page.php -- Leonardo Alcantara Analista de Projetos de Redes |
From: Guy B. <guy...@ch...> - 2002-02-07 22:25:15
|
Leonardo Alcantara Moreira (leo...@mo...) on 07/02/2002 at 14:44 wrote: > I have had some trouble trying to install mantis 0.17.0, but in the > end I found some bug I would like to share with you. I've just begun running > it a couple of days ago. We stopped our plan to upgrade to 0.17.x. Am I the only one having huge display problems with 0.17.0 ? The css have been changed a lot. The CVS version has the same problems, but I thought it was just not focusing on esthetics and didn't worry. Has something been forgotten or not well tested enough ? -- bug |
From: Kenzaburo I. <pre...@30...> - 2002-02-07 22:27:31
|
What browsers are you using? -Ken > > I have had some trouble trying to install mantis 0.17.0, but in the > > end I found some bug I would like to share with you. I've just begun > running > > it a couple of days ago. > > We stopped our plan to upgrade to 0.17.x. Am I the only one having > huge display problems with 0.17.0 ? The css have been changed a lot. > The CVS version has the same problems, but I thought it was just not > focusing on esthetics and didn't worry. Has something been forgotten > or not well tested enough ? > >-- > bug |
From: Guy B. <guy...@ch...> - 2002-02-07 22:50:43
|
Kenzaburo Ito (pre...@30...) on 07/02/2002 at 16:25 wrote: > What browsers are you using? Konqueror 2.2.1, Mozilla 0.97 and Navigator 4.77 None displays the pages « as nicely as » those of rel 0.16. (Lynx, links and w3m do not work at all, but that's another thread to start :-)) -- bug |
From: Kenzaburo I. <pre...@30...> - 2002-02-07 23:35:22
|
I'm using Mozilla 0.9.8, IE 5.5 and IE 6, and Opera 6 (all Win32) and=20 everything seems ok. Mozilla 0.9.7 and Konqueror both have some bugs that= =20 Mantis exposes, but I wasn't aware of big display problems. A description= =20 of some of the problems might be useful. Unfortunately, I don't have=20 access to any Unix web browsers at the moment. Thanks, -Ken >Kenzaburo Ito (pre...@30...) on 07/02/2002 at 16:25 wrote: > > > What browsers are you using? > > Konqueror 2.2.1, Mozilla 0.97 and Navigator 4.77 > None displays the pages =AB as nicely as =BB those of rel 0.16. > (Lynx, links and w3m do not work at all, but that's another thread to > start :-)) > >-- > bug |
From: August <ml...@au...> - 2002-02-07 23:40:16
|
Don't see any problems myself with Mozilla .9.8 / IE 6 which are the two I use daily. And while you're dragging yourself over the hot coals for failing to integrate patches, perhaps mark anonymous login assigned under tasks, so it at least prevents duplication of effort. If there are problems with the anonymous login patch I submitted I'd be happy to hear about it. -AZ -----Original Message----- From: man...@li... [mailto:man...@li...] On Behalf Of Kenzaburo Ito Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 3:33 PM To: Guy Brand; man...@li... Subject: Re: [Mantisbt-dev] Patches I'm using Mozilla 0.9.8, IE 5.5 and IE 6, and Opera 6 (all Win32) and everything seems ok. Mozilla 0.9.7 and Konqueror both have some bugs that Mantis exposes, but I wasn't aware of big display problems. A description of some of the problems might be useful. Unfortunately, I don't have access to any Unix web browsers at the moment. Thanks, -Ken |
From: Kenzaburo I. <pre...@30...> - 2002-02-07 23:50:38
|
Marked! I'll let you know if there are issues. -Ken >Don't see any problems myself with Mozilla .9.8 / IE 6 which are the two >I use daily. > >And while you're dragging yourself over the hot coals for failing to >integrate patches, perhaps mark anonymous login assigned under tasks, so >it at least prevents duplication of effort. If there are problems with >the anonymous login patch I submitted I'd be happy to hear about it. |
From: Jeff P. <bru...@ya...> - 2002-02-08 06:17:48
|
0.17.0 works beautifully in Konq 2.2.2 Mozilla 0.9.7+ and links. I haven't tried it under lynx. I'd be interested in a description of the *huge* display problems. The CSS works great for me too without any modifications. However, the original poster does fix an important problem and does highlight an interesting PATH/FILE combo situation in the uploads DB and how it is handled. You really can see the badness when you rename directories and move things around. There's no clean way to make sure your attachments are downloadable. (Say you had one mantis and then you decided to added another mantis later using Virtual Hosting to differentiate the two. Then you decide to move the original mantis from /var/www/html to /var/www/html/www.hostname.com/ . With 0.17.0 thus far, you have to do some MyPHPAdmin stuff or your own SQL script to adjust the paths, etc.) Maybe the directory should be taken from config_inc.php and not stored/retrieved in the DB... Thanks! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com |
From: Guy B. <guy...@ch...> - 2002-02-08 09:09:16
|
Jeff Pitman (bru...@ya...) on 07/02/2002 at 22:17 wrote: > 0.17.0 works beautifully in Konq 2.2.2 Mozilla 0.9.7+ > and links. I haven't tried it under lynx. I'd be > interested in a description of the *huge* display > problems. I haven't said "huge", our users said "huge", so I just reported that to you using the same description. I've seen bad looking displays with their Navigator 4.x (Mac or Linux) and have reproduced some with a testdb. When you were used to a clean display, it's true that one does not want to "upgrade". Two small snaps are on http://wwwchimie.u-strasbg/~bug/snap1.jpg and http://wwwchimie.u-strasbg/~bug/snap2.jpg. > The CSS works great for me too without any > modifications. Under opera, IE and konqueror (upgraded to the last 2.2) the display (stylesheets) is (are) fine. I'm gonna post a note to the mantisbt news asking people to upgrade their browser. Someone working on mantis compatibility with lynx/links/w3m text browsers ? -- bug |
From: Jeff P. <bru...@ya...> - 2002-02-08 13:41:12
|
--- Guy Brand <guy...@ch...> wrote: > not want to "upgrade". Two small snaps are on > http://wwwchimie.u-strasbg/~bug/snap1.jpg and > http://wwwchimie.u-strasbg/~bug/snap2.jpg. Can you fix these for me? I cannot access them. > Someone working on mantis compatibility with > lynx/links/w3m text > browsers ? Mantis is quite usable under links. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com |
From: Veyret S. <sv...@ax...> - 2009-07-03 14:21:43
|
Hi all, I attached patches for issue http://www.mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=10677 in the tracker. Plej kore, S. Veyret |
From: Veyret S. <sv...@ax...> - 2009-07-03 14:45:13
|
Hi all, I attached patches for issue http://www.mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=10677 in the tracker. Plej kore, S. Veyret |
From: Guy B. <guy...@ch...> - 2002-01-04 16:13:50
|
Steven Green (st...@gr...) on 04/01/2002 at 11:26 wrote: > I don't know what the project policy on doing commits is... as I am new to > the mantisbt project I thought it best to send the patch here instead of > commiting it to CVS. Following Steven's post, I let you know here of two other pieces of patch against mantis release 0.16.x I made available at http://chimie4.u-strasbg.fr/~bug/reaffect.patch http://chimie4.u-strasbg.fr/~bug/viewhandler.patch The first allows reaffecting a bug to a different project as the one it was initialy attached to. The second allows displaying of the bug handler name in view_all page. In case of interest, the first can be enhanced with global vars, user access level checking and better email notifications. Also the reaffect.patch is doing two queries additionnal queries to the project table where probably one would be enough, but this work was done as all our "bugs" here come into an "incoming queue" fed in by email by users and most of them always need to be reaffected to an other "queue" (project). Both simple patches can be easily tweaked to run against current CVS version too. As Ken works on bug reaffecting for release 0.17.0, maybe the first patch will soon be useless. My two cents. -- bug |