On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Jonathan "Duke" Leto wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> Thanks so much for working on this, Andy!
>
> The labels/tags look fine to me. I would say that if we could remove some of
> the basic Trac markup (like removing/replacing [BR]) and attempt to leave
> behind plain text, that would get us where we need to go.
I don't much care what it looks like, but it would be useful if in-line
code and patches survive intact, and links continue to work.
> > There is still much to do:
> >
> > * Add ticket history
>
> Do we really need this? What about just linking to the original TT?
> That seems like less work.
But the history often contains useful information. Is there a suggested
fix? Is there something pending a decision? Is there a patch? Leaving
it behind means that information is invisible to the Github search.
Thus, in order to explore an issue, one now will have to do *two*
searches, one on Github, and one on Trac. That hardly seems helpful to
me. I think adding the ticket history would be useful.
> > * Add ticket ownership
There's also ticket "reporter", and the distinction can be useful.
> Do we need this? Perhaps we should let this be a "reset" where people can
> decide what tickets they want to assign themselves. I know that many TT's got
> assigned to me for various reasons but I really had no time or motivation to
> work on them. I assume the same holds for others.
That's undoubtedly true. On the other hand, I find it convenient to
search for tickets I reported.
> It looks really awesome! Can't wait until we pull the plug on Trac.
Just to state the obvious: If you leave the ticket history in Trac, you
can't pull the plug without losing useful information. For example, GH
issue 124 refers to Trac TT #1046, which refers to RT #56484. The RT links
still work. Is there a long-term plan for the Trac links?
--
Andy Dougherty [email protected]
_______________________________________________
http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
