Content
View differences
Updated by Parimal Satyal over 1 year ago
### Note
These specs were split (de-scoped) from the following feature:
###46481
### **Acceptance criteria**
* Extend the current generic message ("Dates changed by changes to related {type} #{id}: {subject}" so that it is more specific:
* Use one of these strings, depending on the change:
* For date changes caused by relations:
* "**Dates changed** as a result of by changes to predecessor {type} #{id}: {subject}"
* "**Dates changed** by changes to follower {type} #{id}: {subject}"
* For date changes caused by children:
* "**Dates changed** as a result of by changes to child {type} #{id}: {subject}"
* If the immediate relationship cannot be established:
* "**Dates changed** as a result of by changes to {type} #{id}: {subject}
* **\[open\]** does this ever happen?
* If the related work package is not visible by the current user (ghost relations)
user:
* "**Dates changed** as a result of by changes to a related work package"
* When aggregating, only name the responsible work package for the last update
These specs were split (de-scoped) from the following feature:
###46481
### **Acceptance criteria**
* Extend the current generic message ("Dates changed by changes to related {type} #{id}: {subject}" so that it is more specific:
*