We could also use the tools that that script uses 
(http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/IssueTrackerAPI and 
https://github.com/ask/python-github2) to write the bot that I was talking 
about below.

Aaron Meurer

On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Haz wrote:

> - https://github.com/cfinke/googlecode2github
> 
>   ?
> 
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, it does indeed seem that they've improved.  
> 
> Show me a way to transfer issues from Google Code to GitHub, and you may have 
> sold me.
> 
> Aaron Meurer
> 
> On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Haz wrote:
> 
>> Integration with pull requests
>> - https://github.com/blog/712-pull-requests-2-0
>> 
>> New issue stuff:
>> - https://github.com/blog/831-issues-2-0-the-next-generation
>> 
>>   What about a gradual migration? Prohibit new issues on Google, and 
>> gradually close them all off.
>> 
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Well, first off, I'm not even sure if that would solve the problem.  How 
>> well does GitHub integrate their issues with their pull requests.
>> 
>> Anyway, the conditions for moving to any other issue tracker would be:
>> 
>> - It would need to be at least as powerful as Google Code.  Ideally, if we 
>> are going through the hassle to move, it should be more powerful.  This is 
>> talking about things like labels and stuff (I'd need to check to see how 
>> good GitHub is with this).
>> 
>> - We would need to transfer all the current issues over to the new tracker, 
>> keeping all numbers the same.  This is the most important one, and also the 
>> most difficult.  It's important because we have references to issue numbers 
>> *everywhere*: in the code, in the commit log, in the mailing list, etc. 
>> 
>> Currently, Google Code makes it kind of hard to export the issues (you have 
>> to do it manually; there's no xml or svn output).  
>> 
>> Personally, I'm pretty content with the Google Code issue tracker, other 
>> than the issues I mentioned below.  It works well, and has some nice 
>> features (like the advanced search).
>> 
>> I haven't played with GitHub's issue tracker too much, but from what I saw, 
>> it isn't as good (yet).
>> 
>> Aaron Meurer
>> 
>> On Apr 29, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Haz wrote:
>> 
>>> What were the road-blocks from moving the issues to github again?
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Does anyone have any ideas on ways that we can better manage the pull 
>>> requests at GitHub and the issues at Google Code?  Right now there are some 
>>> issues:
>>> 
>>> - People forget to reference the issue number on the pull request or the 
>>> pull request on the issue.  The best case is that I notice this and fix it, 
>>> but it's possible that people don't even realize that there is an issue for 
>>> the pull request or visa versa.
>>> 
>>> - Even when people remember to reference the pull request on the issue, 
>>> either they forget or don't have permissions to add the NeedsReview and 
>>> username labels.  I think this can be partially fixed by making sure that 
>>> all regular contributors are members in the Google Code project so that 
>>> they can add labels to issues.  I used to be able to handle this manually 
>>> pretty easily, but lately the traffic has increased by quite a bit (because 
>>> of the GSoC students) and it's getting harder to manage.  Ironically, this 
>>> makes the labels even more essential.
>>> 
>>> - People forget to check the corresponding issue before pushing in a pull 
>>> request, like as happened with issue 2302/pull 257.  I am just using this 
>>> as a recent example, I am not trying to blame Chris here.
>>> 
>>> - It's easy to type the wrong issue or pull number.  Pull 257 is also an 
>>> example of this (and again, I don't want to blame anyone here; the point is 
>>> that typos are easy to make).
>>> 
>>> Does anyone know if it would be possible to have some kind of more 
>>> automated system, where most or all of the above are done automatically?  
>>> In particular, it would be nice if the following could be automated:
>>> 
>>> - If a pull request is created, then the issue should be marked as 
>>> NeedsReview with a label of the person's name.  This could be based on 
>>> referencing an issue number in a pull request.
>>> 
>>> - If someone puts the NeedsBetterPatch or even PassedReview label on an 
>>> issue, the pull request should be notified.
>>> 
>>> - All pull requests should have an issue, I think.  Maybe something could 
>>> warn someone if they forgot to reference an issue number in a pull request, 
>>> and ask them if they want to create a new issue for it, or reference an 
>>> already existing one.
>>> 
>>> - In the pull requests, automatically change "issue 1234" to "[issue 1234: 
>>> solve(4**x-x**4, x) (and similar) should give all 
>>> solutions](http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1234)", or add 
>>> that as a new comment.  This would make it so that you could see the issue 
>>> title, which would let you verify that the number was correct, and it also 
>>> would auto-link it, which would make navigation easier.
>>> 
>>> With that, you would just have to make sure that you reference the issue 
>>> number in the pull request (it could also parse commit messages), and the 
>>> rest would be taken care of.
>>> 
>>> I'm thinking this should be done by some kind of bot somewhere, but even a 
>>> script that you run from your computer and goes through and it does it from 
>>> your account (after checking to see if it has already been done or not) 
>>> would work.
>>> 
>>> I'm putting out a request to the community, because I don't know how to 
>>> program such a thing. Does this sound like a good idea?  Does it sound 
>>> feasible?
>>> 
>>> Aaron Meurer
>>> 
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "sympy" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "sympy" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "sympy" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "sympy" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "sympy" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "sympy" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.

Reply via email to