Next steps of the trac-to-maniphest migration?

Matthew Pickering matthewtpickering at
Tue Jan 24 10:37:36 UTC 2017

Thank you Simon.

If you have any example queries that you run often or queries which
you have embedded into wikipages then it would be useful to share them
so I can investigate.

With regards to the last point. This is possible in a more structured
way. You can create a dashboard with a single query embedded and then
embed this using standard remarkup syntax.

For example on a project page, I embedded a query which matched
tickets with "PatternSynonyms" and "newcomer".

You can embed this panel anywhere where remarkup is accepted. For
example, in a wiki page - or

It is a bit more heavyweight to setup but much easier to get right due
to the structured editing interface which trac doesn't provide for
these kinds of queries.


On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at> wrote:
> On 21 January 2017 at 22:21, Matthew Pickering <matthewtpickering at>
> wrote:
>> Hello devs,
>> Thanks to everyone so far who has looked at and commented on the
>> prototype. It seems that the response is generally positive so I would
>> like to drive the process forwards.
>> In order for that to happen, someone needs to decide whether we as a
>> community think it is a good idea. It seems to make sense if those who
>> use the tracker most make this decision so I propose that Simon and
>> Ben should ultimately be the ones to do this.
>> Therefore, I propose this timeline
>> 1. Before 11th Feb (3 weeks from today) we decide whether we want to
>> migrate the issue tracker.
>> 2. A working group is established who will work through the details of
>> the migration with the minimum of a final prototype built from a clone
>> of the actual installation.
>> 3. Migration would happen before the end of March.
> Sounds good to me.  I personally have only glanced at it so far, but I'll
> give it some attention.  I'm pretty attached to Trac's ability to do complex
> queries on tickets and the ability to embed ticket queries into wiki pages,
> so the gains would have to be compelling to outweigh the losses for me.  But
> I'll give it a closer look.
> Cheers
> Simon
>> I think Ben summarised the discussions quite well on the wiki page -
>> And the prototype continues to exist here.
>> As always, any comments welcome.
>> Matt
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs at

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list