https://www.redmine.org/https://www.redmine.org/favicon.ico?16793021292013-03-19T17:31:45ZRedmineRedmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=470732013-03-19T17:31:45ZDaniel Felix
<ul><li><strong>File</strong> <a href="/attachments/9319">remove_required_on_is_private.diff</a> <a class="icon-only icon-download" title="Download" href="/attachments/download/9319/remove_required_on_is_private.diff">remove_required_on_is_private.diff</a> added</li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>Toshi MARUYAMA</i></li><li><strong>Target version</strong> set to <i>2.3.1</i></li></ul><p>Your right. This seems to be wrong.</p>
<p>I've attached a small patch. This solved the wrong display.</p>
<p><a class="user active" href="https://www.redmine.org/users/10651">toshio harita</a>: Maybe you could commit this?</p>
<p>I just set this to 2.3.1 as a Bugfix. If you think, that this should be included in 2.3 please be free to commit this. :-)<br />This shouldn't hold back the release of 2.3.0. :-)</p>
<p>Best regards,<br />Daniel</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=470762013-03-19T18:28:19ZDipan Mehta
<ul></ul><p>Actually, in any Boolean type fields - the notion of 'Required' vs. 'Not Required' has no significant. If you leave the field without touching and even if default value is not set - it actually defaults to 'false' and that is legitimate value. Alternatively, nothing can force the user to check or uncheck in case of Boolean fields even if you critically need input (by making it required)</p>
<p>So while, field may be required it wont force you to select the issues as private!</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=470822013-03-19T19:42:02ZDaniel Felix
<ul></ul><p>Dipan Mehta wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So while, field may be required it wont force you to select the issues as private!</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes your right with your post, but it's definitly wrong that this field is marked as required in the workflow menu.<br />So this obviously seems to be a mistake. ;-)</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=471102013-03-20T04:08:07ZMischa The Evil
<ul></ul><p>Daniel Felix wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So this obviously seems to be a mistake. ;-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>For what I can remember out-of-my-head this is done on a purpose related to how private issues were implemented. I'm not sure though...</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=471872013-03-20T17:43:46ZDaniel Felix
<ul></ul><p>Yes this may be. But, you can't ensure a required on a checkbox in any way. this is by design. :-)</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=475302013-03-26T20:26:36ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>Toshi MARUYAMA</i> to <i>Jean-Philippe Lang</i></li></ul><p>With this patch applied, the private flag can then be configured as required in the workflow permission configuration screen. Not sure that it's a better option.</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=475342013-03-26T20:58:51ZDaniel Felix
<ul></ul><p>Yes this is right. This will be wrong too.</p>
<p>What do you think? would it be a better solution to prepare that no checkbox could be set to required? <br />Or change the way a required is applied on checkboxes?</p>
<p>For example:<br />Require on checkboxes is allowed and would be handled as "must check".<br />Some examples could be the disclaimer or something like that. This way you can force special roles to ensure that they accept some terms, for example.</p>
<p>But requiring a checkbox is a wrong behaviour in my opinion. :-)</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=475362013-03-26T21:11:41ZEtienne Massip
<ul></ul><p>Daniel Felix wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>But requiring a checkbox is a wrong behaviour in my opinion. :-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Well it actually implies no specific behavior, it's just inaccurate information.</p>
<p>Not sure it's worth changing it.</p> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=489922013-05-01T13:15:29ZJean-Philippe Langjp_lang@yahoo.fr
<ul><li><strong>Target version</strong> changed from <i>2.3.1</i> to <i>Candidate for next major release</i></li></ul> Redmine - Defect #13522: Private field is shown as requiredhttps://www.redmine.org/issues/13522?journal_id=1038772021-08-22T09:18:33ZMischa The Evil
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-2 status-1 priority-4 priority-default" href="/issues/9432">Feature #9432</a>: Default value for the private issue flag</i> added</li></ul>