Next steps of the trac-to-maniphest migration?

[Simon Marlow]

On 24 January 2017 at 14:09, Matthew Pickering <matthewtpickering at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Can we have custom fields with Maniphest?  I like the rich metadata we
> have
> > with OS / Architecture / Component / Failure types.  It's true that we
> don't
> > use it consistently, but at least when we do use it there's an obvious
> and
> > standard way to do it.  When I search for RTS bugs I know that at least
> all
> > the bugs I'm seeing are RTS bugs, even if I'm not seeing all the RTS
> bugs.
> > People responsible for particular architectures can keep their metadata
> up
> > to date to make it easier to manage their ticket lists.
>
> There was a long discussion about this on the original thread with
> people echoing this sentiment. I am of the opinion that projects would
> be a better fit as
>
> 1. They integrate better with the rest of phabricator
> 2. They are not relevant to every ticket. There are tickets about
> infrastructure matters for which the concept of OS is irrelevant for
> example.
>
> I like to think of projects as structured unstructured metadata.
> The structure is that you
> can group different project tags together as subprojects of a parent
> project but adding projects to a ticket is unstructured.
> This is how "architecture" is implemented currently -
> http://ec2-52-214-147-146.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/pr
> oject/view/101/
> On trac, keywords are not very useful as they are completely
> unstructured and not discoverable. I think projects greatly improve on
> this.
>

I think the problem here is that it's not obvious which projects should be
added to tickets.  As a ticket submitter, if I have metadata I'm not likely
to add it, and as developers we'll probably forget which fields we could
add.

Yes, Trac keywords are even more useless.  But we don't generally use
keywords; the point here is about the other metadata fields (OS,
Architecture, etc.).  Just having some text on the ticket creation page to
suggest adding OS / Architecture would help a lot.

Cheers
Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20170124/9abf2813/attachment.html>