How do I list all 'Urgent' priority bugs across all projects in Redmine? - migration

We're migrating from Bugzilla to Redmine and there's one feature of bugzilla which I'm unsure how to replicate in Redmine.
Is there any way to list all the bugs / features of a specific priority across all projects?
We used to use this mechanism to identify what bugs / features to assign next to developers. If listing all urgent bugs doesn't work in Redmine, perhaps there's a different way of working which could be used instead?

This is easy:
Go to https://your.redmine.domain/issues?set_filter=1 : This should clear any current filter criteria and display all open issues across all projects the currently logged user has access to.
Select your filter - in this case, add a filter for Priority, and hit apply
You may save this filter by clicking on Save: This will allow you to access to this filter quickly without configuring it every time. You may also choose grouping criteria as well as the columns to display.

Related

Work Item Query Policy to check workitems match on merge

With our TFS 2015 source control we require developers to check-in changes against work items.
However, we've had a couple of instances where a developer has checked in against one work item within our development branch, but then when merging to our QA branch they've checked in the merged changes to a different work item. An example of this is where a bug has been created underneath a PBI, the changes in dev have been checked in against a task under the bug, but then merged to QA against the PBI itself. This causes us issues with traceability.
I've seen that it's possible to add a check-in policy of "Work Item Query Policy". I'm just wondering if there is a way to write a query that will determine if the work item of a check-in after a merge matches the work item of the source changesets? I'm not necessarily after the exact query (though it would be lovely if someone could provide one :) ), really I'm just wondering whether it's possible or not to have a query to do this - i.e. is the information available to queries in TFS?
You can't do this with the existing policies, you'd need to build a custom policy.
So, technically this is possible. You can access the VersionControlServer object through the PendingChanges object:
this.PendingCheckin.PendingChanges.Workspace.VersionControlServer
You can use that to query the history of the branch in question and grab the work items associated to the check-ins in that branch.
You can check the associated workitems to the current workitem:
this.PendingCheckin.WorkItems
You could probably even provide the option to auto-correct by adding the correct work items to the checkin upon validation.
One of my policies provides an example on using the VersionControlServer from a policy.

CKAN package group permissions

How can I change the permissions in CKAN, so every editor/admin of an organization can add a group to a dataset (right now, the editor or admin has to be a member of the group to be able to add a certain group to a dataset)?
The dataportal I am developing only has 8 groups and every admin/editor should be able to add these groups to a dataset.
It seems to me that Group permissions are a bit of a hangover from the past (there was a time in CKAN without Organizations and only groups, and groups are based heavily on Organizations internally) and I wanted to make a proposal to the CKAN developers for providing an option to remove them (i.e. every Org editor or Admin can add anything to any group). Apart from that possibility there are a couple of workarounds:
Make everyone of these users a superuser (probably bad)
Make a "master" group which contains all existing groups (this is only
possible via the API) and then use the cascading authorization
configuration:
http://docs.ckan.org/en/latest/maintaining/configuration.html#ckan-auth-roles-that-cascade-to-sub-groups
Make an extension that hooks into the user creation process and
automatically adds all Org editors and Admins to all groups
Make an
extension that doesn't check or relaxes auth when trying to add
datasets to groups (this seems like overkill compared to the general
change I mentioned at the beginning: both would need to be coded and
I am more interested in doing the first one!)

Youtrack Search query for issues viewed since last update

In Youtrack 6.5, is it possible to generate a search query which lists all issues that have been updated since the user have viewed them?
Like -read and #Unresolved (unfortunately this only displays issues that have been read at least one time)
The reason behind this is: It's quite difficult to determine which tasks you need to answer to or take care of. Especially in a team having updates on tasks during the day.
Or is there another way to manage such "unseen changes" in issues (maybe just for those you are watching on)? Or is there something similar to an inbox (except for notifications via eMail)?
No, it's not supported. Have a look at https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/JT-19610

Hierarchical Use of SharePoint 2013

I'm trying to determine the best way to utilize SharePoint 2013 to manage a very large project with a number of hierarchical elements. I've thought about using cascading/embedded group permissions (doesn't appear to be possible), audience targeting (I'm concerned about user's ability to understand and correctly enter the appropriate target audience), using some kind of session variable fed from a SharePoint list to determine how to characterize entries but then I need a way to auto filter them in lists (seems awfully complex and not sure this will even work). So I'm wondering if I'm missing a better way to do this. This being the following:
I have various staff levels: people at the bottom who are located at a site, a person at the site that is the manager, a hub that links various sites, areas that oversee hubs and include an area manager. I'd like these various people to be able to see only whats relevant to them so for a simple example: a list with a calendar view. An area lead should be able to see all entries made by his site leads, while a site/hub manager should only be able to see entries made by people under their respective site/hub. This would work perfect if I could assign groups to groups and then filter the list instead of by [me] by [(some permission filter option)]
There has got to be a simple way to do this, anyone have any ideas? I think I'm missing some capability of SharePoint 2013 to do something like this and thus am making it harder than it should be.

Unbound checkbox in continuous form

I'm beating a dead horse here, but I still haven't found the answer I am looking for. I am throwing together an Access Database that deals with lockout procedures for our various machines at work. I have a continuous form setup so that it dynamically populates based on various complex/machine criteria. Since only portions of the machines need to be locked out at a given time, it is necessary to select the various devices from the list that was populated dynamically. When users select the various devices that they wish to lockout, they will then be able to automatically print tags for the selected devices. Which is where the unbound checkbox conundrum comes in... Yay!!!
Since it is possible for multiple users to be using the database at a given time, I don't believe that binding the checkbox to a yes/no selection within my table is the correct path to take. This is due to the fact that having multiple users picking various devices would result in additional/unnecessary tags being printed out to each user. I know that it's possible to have an unbound checkbox within a continuous form, but I have not come across any sample code that has this functionality.
If there is another path that I can take, please offer any suggestions as I am an Access novice, and am open to new ideas.
EDIT
I should mention that the database will reside within Citrix. I am not sure if this affect anything, but its worth mentioning at least.
I am assuming that you are using a client server setting, where the application file resides on a local machine. (Or on a local instance in the case of RDP / Citrix)
In that case, you can have a local table to save the checkbox information without causing any conflicts between users.
You will be using a bound checkbox, so problem solved.