Re: [RFC] Use GitLab Milestones

[James]

Hello

On 22/06/2020 18:33, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> In short, I'd like to propose that we replace the labels Fixed_x_y_z
> with milestones x.y.z and use these to track which issues were fixed
> for a particular release.

Just so you know I have just gone through all the 'Fixed_' labels this 
morning and they are all consistent now.

The form is

Fixed_X_XX_XX

e.g Fixed _2_04_01 or Fixed_2_19_01

There was no consistency for single digit or version 'zero' builds so I 
made sure they always had 2 numerals even they were '00' just in case 
this helps with find/replace.

> This has the advantage of a) less labels
> which makes the drop-downs more usable and b) the possibility to close
> milestones. After all, we're not going to fix bugs in already released
> versions and they don't need to be available for new issues.
>
> This topic already surfaced right after the migration to GitLab, but
> now I finally had the chance to look into this with more detail. In
> particular we now seem to have a common naming for the labels in
> question (great work by James!) which makes scripting much more
> feasible.
>
> I've already started to write scripts to create the 328 milestones
> (that's what they tell me) and automatically assign 3662 issues which
> have exactly one label of the form mentioned above. Additionally, my
> scripts think that there are 277 issues with two or more labels
> (attached to this message). Most are instances of "fix was backported
> to a stable version", but I'd like to check them manually. Also
> deleting the labels stays manual to make sure that the scripts
> correctly assigned the milestones and did not miss any. Help on this
> part would be appreciated after running the scripts 😉
>
> The bad news is that both creating and assigning a milestone induce
> notifications. We likely don't want to receive 4000 emails when running
> the scripts, so we should disable notifications of the lilypond project
> for that time frame. This means contributions during that period (~30
> minutes?) might stay under the radar at first, but that's probably
> acceptable.
That's a good idea. Perhaps block all access for that period (can you do 
that easily and informatively?).
> Let me know what you think!

There is one thing that I find with the labels (and I don't care either 
way) its those of the form

Type::XXX vs just a normal string

e.g. Type::Maintainabilty vs just Maintainability.

You cannot have two labels of Type::XXX on the same issue. So an issue 
that was labelled 'Font' AND 'Scripts' in the past, for instance, could 
not be both Type::Font AND Type::Scripts. One replaces the other (at 
least when I tested it manually).

Is this XXX:: what they call 'scoping'? Anyway, we're a few 'non-scoped' 
labels out there and I wonder (apart from the 'Patch::' labels) what the 
pros and cons of having a XXX:: label vs just a string.

James