Dear open-source maintainers, a letter from GitLab

Re:Dear open-source maintainers, a letter from GitLab by technomancy on Monday January 18, 2016 @06:33AM (#10923792)

If you have to create a label for every platform you support and every existing priority and module, the labels list will become really cluttered, making it hard to find things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Dear open-source maintainers, a letter from GitLab by masklinn on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:26AM (#10923972)

It becomes very long, but it doesn't seem overly cluttered, and it avoids the risk of overly restrictive either/or classification. Rust makes extensive uses of labels on github, they're up to 120 at this point[0] and it seems to work reasonably well even with old issues with a fair number of labels[1]

[0] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/labels

[1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/5016

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Dear open-source maintainers, a letter from GitLab by unethical_ban on Monday January 18, 2016 @10:00AM (#10924711)

FWIW, at my office for the small projects we have tracked, we use a similar method.

type-label

    Types:
    b - bug
    f - feature
    p - priority
    t - team

So we might have issues tagged "p-med b-confirmed t-group1"

Once there is a method to the madness, it's not bad, and it's more flexible on Gitlab's part I'm sure, to have people tag instead of supporting custom drop-down attributes.

[ Parent | on HN ]