[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones
From: |
Dan Eble |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones |
Date: |
Tue, 23 Jun 2020 13:04:27 -0400 |
On Jun 23, 2020, at 04:40, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de> wrote:
>>
> Pretty much that: You can only have one label from the same scope, and
> assigning a second automatically removes the old (cf. Patch::*). I
> actually agree that multiple Type's might be useful. If others are in
> favor as well, we can just rename the labels.
My default position is to avoid restrictions when there isn't a good reason for
them. There are some types in the current set that I can't imagine using
together – for example (Enhancement|Maintainability) with
(Crash|Defect|Regression) – but unless that endangers the efficiency of
someone's workflow, I don't think we should spend time compartmentalizing them.
Patch::* obviously need to remain scoped because they name states in a state
machine.
—
Dan
Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Valentin Villenave, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Jean Abou Samra, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Carl Sorensen, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Carl Sorensen, 2020/06/23
- Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones, Valentin Villenave, 2020/06/23