Proposed update to RT::Interface::Web::UpdateRecordObject

RT Developers
1

All,

I am finding it common in RT customization to want to
set site specific attributes on custom fields.
(This may be useful for other types of RT object, but
most other objects can use custom fields instead of
attributes, but CF objects currently don’t have custom
fields of their own.)

My proposed solution for making this easy comes in
2 parts:

  1. Add (and submit patches) for callbacks were necesssary
    so the RT interface gives form elements for the desired
    attributes.

  2. Modify RT::Interface::Web::UpdateRecordObject and
    possibly RT::Record::Update to accept a standardized
    syntax for form elements (%ARGS) so that Create, Update,
    and Delete will happen automagically once the proper
    form elements are in place.

The alternative is to modify RT so that custom fields can
have custom fields. Haven’t thought about the details of
that…

Powers that be; what do you think?

-Todd

2

All,

I am finding it common in RT customization to want to
set site specific attributes on custom fields.
(This may be useful for other types of RT object, but
most other objects can use custom fields instead of
attributes, but CF objects currently don’t have custom
fields of their own.)

My proposed solution for making this easy comes in
2 parts:

  1. Add (and submit patches) for callbacks were necesssary
    so the RT interface gives form elements for the desired
    attributes.

That sounds pretty reasonable.

  1. Modify RT::Interface::Web::UpdateRecordObject and
    possibly RT::Record::Update to accept a standardized
    syntax for form elements (%ARGS) so that Create, Update,
    and Delete will happen automagically once the proper
    form elements are in place.

That sounds similar to what we’re doing in new stuff and should largely
be what we already do for custom fields. Want to flesh out this proposal
a bit more?