My two cents, even though nobody asked me: I think that every repository in diffusion should have a corresponding component project somewhere. repos without projects don't make sense. You can have multiple repos per project but should not have repos without any project.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Bryan Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Magnus Manske > <[email protected]> wrote: > > A few tools seem to have "Tool-Labs-tools-TOOLNAME" tags already? > > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:32 PM Chase Pettet <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Andre, > >> > >> How do you feel about the idea of automatic project creation using some > >> convention such as tools-$foo or some such. We are ramping up with > usage > >> via https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org/ where management of code with > >> Git/Diffusion is both encouraged and integrated. It would make some > sense > >> to anticipate that code hosted in Diffusion will at some point require > >> associated tasks, and it may be nice to establish a norm now on naming > :) > > Self-service creation of manifest projects (Phabricator bug tracking) > is a planned feature for Striker. This is tracked in > <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T144111>. There isn't strong > consensus one way or the other yet for the project naming scheme. I > proposed `#Tool-<toolname>`. The general existing convention is > `#Tool-Labs-tools-<toolname>`. The existing task would be a good place > for people to continue to discuss the general topic. > > Bryan > -- > Bryan Davis Wikimedia Foundation <[email protected]> > [[m:User:BDavis_(WMF)]] Sr Software Engineer Boise, ID USA > irc: bd808 v:415.839.6885 x6855 > > _______________________________________________ > Labs-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l >
_______________________________________________ Labs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
