-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Multiple repos for a project #244
Comments
I guess the only hassle here is turning this element: upforgrabs:
name: up-for-grabs
link: https://github.com/config-r/config-r/labels/up-for-grabs Into something more like a dictionary (I'm not even sure if this is valid YAML): upforgrabs:
- { project: core, name: up-for-grabs, link: https://github.com/config-r/config-r/labels/up-for-grabs }
- { project: samples, name: up-for-grabs, link: https://github.com/config-r/config-r-samples/labels/up-for-grabs } Will think about this some more (having a separate project is a workaround, but doesn't help for maintainability and associating these two things). |
Yeah, I can't claim to have thought it through very far. The syntax highlighting suggests that it isn't valid YAML 😉 How about this: upforgrabs:
core:
name: up-for-grabs
link: https://github.com/config-r/config-r/labels/up-for-grabs
samples:
name: up-for-grabs
link: https://github.com/config-r/config-r-samples/labels/up-for-grabs |
I'd like to confirm that the |
Given that the schema would change from...
to
... I guess you'd have to migrate all the current entries to the new schema. Otherwise, you'd have to special case the "project names" |
We could have some conventions (say * made up stat |
Don't we just JSONify the YML? Making the JS that consumes it robust against both structures would not be difficult: if element has a |
I'm pretty sure we do when we generate the site.
👍 |
So long as you're happy to special case a child named |
For reference, this cool trick was raised in #310: Given your examples above mention the |
@shiftkey yep, that's a good trick. In fact, @andreasohlund came up with the same idea for the Particular repos - https://github.com/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+user%3AParticular+label%3A%22Tag%3A+Up+For+Grabs%22 - and we're planning to send a PR (which I'll probably do tomorrow) to convert our "NServiceBus" listing to a "NServiceBus and the Particular Software Platform" listing. Given this solution, I'm not sure this issue adds any value for me any longer. I can do the same with ConfigR and other orgs. |
@adamralph I'm glad to know that works for you, but it kinda messes with my API ideas (and I think will break the issue counts currently displayed on the site). As a way out of this, I've also been thinking around separating "links" - the stuff the user navigates to on the site - from more structured data which is available using the GitHub API. For example, you could use the GitHub API to get all interesting issues for the Particular organization:
I'm happy to see your PR come in to use that different URL, and some time next week when I'm properly back at work I'll open up a discussion about extending the project structure to tackle some of these longer-term things... |
@shiftkey one problem that immediately jumps out is that not all projects are on GitHub... |
@adamralph yes. I've been inferring from the issue link where the project is hosted, and I already exclude 6 projects (out of 180ish) from my naive implementation of calculating the issue count in bulk - because I can then hit the GitHub API directly with the right parameters. That's not to say I can't/won't support other providers, but for now there's a bunch of data sitting there that we could leverage for fun on the site... |
Here's a thought... It seems reasonable that multiple repos for a given project may need different tags. I.e., one project has a low-level C hardware interface in one repo and a .NET GUI in another. That would yield a very different set of tags, may have different up for grabs labels, probably has a different description, etc. Instead of addressing this by adding child elements, why not add an optional top-level element to represent that a given project .yml file should be grouped with other ones? I.e.: config-r.yml
config-r-samples.yml
Then in the GUI you could do some things with the new group element to visually distinguish them: |
@shiftkey fair enough, if you're covering 97% of projects then full steam ahead 🚢 @daveaglick not a bad take on the problem, and fully backwards compatible... |
@daveaglick interesting idea 👍 will ponder on it further. I'll leave it up to others here if they have other ideas for doing grouping in the UI. |
E.g. for ConfigR I have up-for-grabs labels in two repos, so I'd like to have two links. I guess I could add a whole separate "ConfigR Samples" entry but it would be nicer if both links were somehow shown against the single ConfigR entry.
I.e.
https://github.com/config-r/config-r/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aup-for-grabs
and
https://github.com/config-r/config-r-samples/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aup-for-grabs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: