Some news:

* Ganesh agreed on IRC that I should try and implement the
aforementioned changes (
* I started looking at the Roundup files on the server and
* I reckoned it was quite a lot of effort and probably was not worth it
* let let us see if we can skip this step and use darcsden directly...
* the main issue with darcsden is that there is no way of notifying
some repository that a fork has patches for it (pull request).
* but, there was an unmerged patch from 2014 that implemented patch
bundle submission to darcsden repositories.
* if we had this working we could take our current workflow from to
* I manually rebased this patch at
, waiting for someone to review it. :-)


2017-07-31 15:26 GMT-03:00 Guillaume Hoffmann <>:
> Hi,
> yesterday I applied the process described at
> , in particular I used the "Maintenance"
> query to go through all open tickets, from oldest to newest. In total
> there were more than 560 open tickets. Now they are "only" 240 (see
> ).
> I closed a lot of tickets using the "given-up" status. Mostly, I closed:
> * bugs related to parts of the code that have been refactored at some
> point (cache system, packs, flags, repo cloning, etc.).
> * bugs related to features that no longer exist.
> * old bugs related to non-linux platform (eg Darcs failure on Windows
> Vista, etc.)
> * tickets that express wishes for Darcs 3
> Nothing I did is definitive, if someone finds I closed an interesting
> issue, please open it again.
> Now, I found that for our current pace of development, the bug tracker
> is too complicated. I'm not sure some fields are useful at all (see
> below). An issue system that uses tags would simplify the whole thing
> We already discussed the possibility of moving all darcs hosting and
> development to ; I still think it is a good idea, we
> could then freeze and still be able to refer to old
> discussions.
> IIRC the most problematic topic was adapting patch submission to
> darcsden.  We still need developer effort to solve this and discuss
> whether use a pull-request workflow or patch bundles.
> In the meantime, I suggest the following concrete steps to simplify
> the current issue and patch tracker:
> * remove the Priority, Milestone and Assigned-To fields of issue
> tickets and patch bundles
> * reduce the Status options of issues to:
>     * open (ex-unknown, waiting-for, needs-*, in-progress)
>     * given-up (ex:given-up, duplicate,wontfix, deferred)
>     * resolved.
>     * Note: when exporting issues to darcsden, change given-up and
> resolved to closed.
> I know nothing about the issue/bug tracker but if Ganesh agrees I can
> try and implement these changes.
> Guillaume
darcs-users mailing list

Reply via email to