Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build 3.5M2 It feels odd that one cannot just rename the <unassigned> changeset; and instead need to manually create a new one, then migrate pieces from <unassigned> to custom change set. In term of out of the box, and usability, I would expect to be able to rename the <unassigned> changeset, and it would create a new one under the cover, and populate it for free.
You can right-click on the <unassigned> change set and then pick Add to > New Change Set... option. You'll get a dialog where you can enter a name for a new change set which will contain all outgoing changes which haven't been assigned to any change set so far (ie all changes from the <unassigned> change set). I don't like the idea of renaming the <unassigned> change set in order to get the same result as above (I guess this is what you would like to get), because I would expect that I'm changing the way the container for all unassigned changes is named, so when a new outgoing change shows up it will appear in the newly renamed <unassigned> set. For example, let's say I don't like the "<unassigned>" name so I changed it to "New outgoing changes", but with a new change I will end up with both "New..." and "<unassigned>" sets, this could be confusing. So, I would suggest to follow the steps from the first paragraph. How does it sound? It's a WONTFIX if you'd asked me.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
