FogBugz Technical Support

A forum for technical support discussion related to Fogbugz.
The current FogBugz Knowledge Base can be found at

Posts by Fog Creek Employees are marked:

Release Notes
Network Status

Feature request: Unlink case

Can I just add a +1 vote to a feature that lets me unlink cases.

It's too easy to mistype a case number, and without the ability to edit past comments you have no way of getting rid of the mistake. So either let me edit past comments, or explicitely supply a "remove link" option.

Either mechanisms could be an admin-only thing if necessary.

Greg Whitfield Send private email
Friday, December 7, 2007
Here's one I tried last night ... it didn't work :(

Edited by Krispy 07/12/2007 (Today) 00:34
See case 228
Edited by Krispy 07/12/2007 (Today) 00:35
Not case 228, Case 229

Krispy Send private email
Friday, December 7, 2007
Hi Greg,

Yup.  Feature request added.
Ben Kamens Send private email
Friday, December 7, 2007
+1 from me as well, for the times we've used "... case N..." when not referring to FB cases at all, e.g. "in case 2 conditions are met"
Charlotte M Send private email
Friday, December 7, 2007
I've always tended to the opinion that case notes are like a chronological Wiki - you SHOULD be able to correct invalid comments (I also believe that invalid comments are worse than no comments!) but ALSO see a history of edits.

That would solve this issue...and expand the already-existing Wiki idea.

Yes, someone could mis-correct something - so revert to previous version, or re-correct it!

May even help solve that other request for the ability to move events from one (e.g. incorrectly opened) case to another?
Andrew Davies Send private email
Sunday, December 9, 2007
The unlink case idea is good.

I think that letting users edit their comments is fraught with danger. FogBugz is an excellent blame assigning tool and the discipline imposed by the  audit trail is a key feature.

The use case is that corrections should only be allowed if the user made a typing mistake or similar, not if they change their mind in 3 weeks time.

An edit feature would be useful but only if it was restricted to 10 minutes (say) from the first edit.

Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Sorry, I don't agree with that.  I don't see any difference between the current chronological-comment display method and an audit trail of changes.  That would give you all the blame you need!

But the time spent parsing a long Discussion each time someone works on a case is costing us a lot.

That includes having to read Relate Cases (including cases Related by accident!)- which could just be bundled into a single-case if editing were allowed (with the related cases being marked as "Resolved : superseded by case 1234" to augment a robust audit trail)
Krispy Send private email
Thursday, January 3, 2008

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics
Powered by FogBugz Bug Tracking and Evidence-Based Scheduling.