Re: Need help with GitHub Issues migration

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 09:39:16AM +0100, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote:
>TLDR; if you have a plan and want to volunteer to set up and actively
>participate in a moderated community with discussions, then let's
>discuss the plan and implement it after the move. [...]
>
the underlying assumption of what you wrote is that the better
accessibility of the medium will decrease the signal-to-noise ratio.
i don't think this would be the case to a significant degree. mc is too
niche for that.
but suppose it would, then i wouldn't mind being the one who flames away
the flamers. :'-D

as you noted, the list has almost no traffic, and i wouldn't expect that
to change much. that makes the question mostly irrelevant in the first
place. otoh, one can view that as a reason to consolidate further, to
not have spread out resources for something that doesn't matter all that
much.

>It is not possible to add watchers to issues using the API.
>
too bad.

>GitHub will consider you a member of a conversation if you're mentioned
>in the issue and/or a comment, and will send you updates if you haven't
>disabled it in your profile.
>
are you sure? it will definitely send a notification for the mention
itself, but if the recipient doesn't respond (which would make them a
participant and thus a watcher by default), would they keep receiving
followups?

>https://github.com/MidnightCommander/mc-test-1/issues/28
>
>I hope you've been notified. If not, I'm afraid there's nothing we can
>do.
>
it didn't work, but that might also be because the repo is archived.

anyway, i was aiming specifically at filtering, "my issues" style.

>I want to have the same repository for code and issues, so that ticket
>references in the code can be linked to the issues, and commit
>references in the issues can be linked to the code.
>
inter-repo linking is a thing. it's just a bit verbose/ugly, so
certainly a thing to avoid.

>Unfortunately, this means we'll have to swap repositories, but I'm
>afraid there's no way around it.
>
i'm not sure i get what you're saying here. that you can't import the
issues into the pre-existing repo? that would indeed suck a bit, as
there were a few worthwhile discussions in a few PRs. it should be
possible to export the data, combine it, and then import it, no?

>I would rather keep tasks in the same repository for now. We can see if
>we can split things up later. I'd rather not start splitting things too
>much. And I think so far it has been a pretty small part of the
>tickets.
>
that's fair enough. most of the "adm" tasks are actually about release
engineering anyway, and that definitely belongs to the main repo.

>That is correct, but this component has received tickets for both
>translation (l10n) and internationalization (i18n). I don't think
>"area: i18n & l10n" looks much better and makes it clearer. Is it
>better now or not?
>
it's more correct, but it looks noisy. maybe "locales" would be a better
keyword.

>>> * Attachment uploads via the API are not supported and will be
>>> hosted in a separate repository

you mean like that? https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/46951#discussioncomment-6394596

maybe https://github.com/j178/github-s3 would be an alternative?


-- 
mc-devel mailing list
mc-devel-+hD5IHI5XseWCegYutOAJTiNl0CLU6MPYPYVAmT7z5s@public.gmane.org
https://lists.midnight-commander.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel