On 2025-09-16 12:05 am, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On 9/15/2025 8:26 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Hi Timo
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 07:19:17PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via
ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On 9/15/2025 2:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Hi
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via
ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
[...]
Ideas, Comments ?
I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually
retire it.
btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
for importing trac ?
Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother
redmine is apparently a "trac clone written in ruby".
No idea if it's database-compatible, or just similar idea but full
re-implementation.
But really, I don't see how in the long run a separate issue tracker
from
Forgejo makes sense.
The issue IDs will eventually clash, and integration and linking
between
them will be a right mess.
the mix of trac and Forgejo is already a mess if theres no _clean_
way to import the tickets
We would always have 15 years of ticket history outside our issue
tracker
if you really want to have pull requests and issues have distinct
positive numbers
well, make one even and the other odd above the value where they
would clash
so it would be
0..20k Trac
20k-25k Forgejo
25k+ even Forgejo
25k+ odd redmine
That is not something that can be done, and honestly seems a bit silly
to me.
Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.
redmine can accept OAuth2/OIDC logins via plugins IIUC
would need to be tested in a test setup but there seems support for
shared
accounts in principle
I honestly don't understand the insistence on an external issue tracker.
That just makes things more complex for no real reason.
And I also firmly disagree about the current setup being "a mess".
With no new tickets being allowed on trac, its quite the opposite of
that.
If issues/tickets could be opened on both, then it'd be a mess.
This way it's just a migration.
And the tickets on trac won't go away, so no history will be lost.
If you really want, I can import them all into Forgejo, but _that_
will be horribly messy.
It's best to have a single issue tracker.
It's best for the issue tracker to be integrated with the code workflow.
What can happen is that if an existing open trac issue is taken up for
active resolution, then a new issue at Forgejo can be opened, with a
reference to the trac issue. A comment can be left at trac linking to
this new Forge issue, so all further activity occurs at code.ffmpeg.
This would avoid any wholesale migration or duplication.
Regards,
Gyan
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-le...@ffmpeg.org
