Trying this again, since it was ignored last time (May 10). I''ve had over 1700 downloads of the PDF slides from my presentation. Would be nice to include the keyword list in the update I''m putting together now. Is there any interest in using keywords on tickets, or should I just tell potential contributors to ignore them? ------------- In putting together my talk about contributing to Rails, I realized I couldn''t find any write-up anywhere of what keywords are used for tickets in Trac. It seems that people just put any old keywords on tickets, sort of like tagging photos in flickr. But I know there are at least a few keywords that matter, like "docs" and perhaps "tiny", and ones used at release time like "needs_review". Does someone know of a standard list? If not, would it be possible to put our noggins together and come up with a list of keywords that the core team cares about? -- Josh Susser http://blog.hasmanythrough.com
I''m stepping out there to day this. There are obviously keywords which are re-used time and time again and perhaps could be put in an official list. However, I''m not surprised that people are not jumping towards codifying the keywords list into a strict guildline. If you want to give the new users advice, then grab the most popular ones you see and write some description. Making keywords "official" at this point is probably overkill, but not so far in the future as to be useless.> or should I just tell potential contributors to ignore them?I think that''s overkill. How about, "If you notice your patch being ignored or want to mark it for attention, then please use sensible keywords when creating a patch or bug listing. How does that work? -hampton. On 5/15/06, Josh Susser <josh@hasmanythrough.com> wrote:> > Trying this again, since it was ignored last time (May 10). I''ve had > over 1700 downloads of the PDF slides from my presentation. Would be > nice to include the keyword list in the update I''m putting together > now. Is there any interest in using keywords on tickets, or should I > just tell potential contributors to ignore them? > > ------------- > In putting together my talk about contributing to Rails, I realized I > couldn''t find any write-up anywhere of what keywords are used for > tickets in Trac. It seems that people just put any old keywords on > tickets, sort of like tagging photos in flickr. But I know there are > at least a few keywords that matter, like "docs" and perhaps "tiny", > and ones used at release time like "needs_review". Does someone know > of a standard list? If not, would it be possible to put our noggins > together and come up with a list of keywords that the core team cares > about? > > -- > Josh Susser > http://blog.hasmanythrough.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails-core mailing list > Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core >_______________________________________________ Rails-core mailing list Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
Josh Susser
2006-May-16 06:46 UTC
Re: resend: is there a list of standard keywords in trac?
Hi Hampton,> I''m stepping out there to day this. There are obviously keywords which > are re-used time and time again and perhaps could be put in an > official list. > However, I''m not surprised that people are not jumping towards > codifying > the keywords list into a strict guildline.Thanks for the response. I wasn''t suggesting we should limit the list of keywords (though I''m not opposing it either). I was asking if there was a list of keywords that mattered. All I know of so far are "docs" and "tiny", and the ones that get used during the push to release. But I either don''t have permission or can''t figure out how to look at the report definitions to see if there are any other keywords that are used for generating reports.> If you want to give the new users advice, then grab the most > popular ones you see and write some description.Here''s the most frequently used keywords, the ones that appear in 20 or more tickets: 117 fd 65 postgresql 58 performance 54 ajax 49 needs_review 49 test 47 routes 47 sqlserver 46 activerecord 45 mysql 43 rake 37 documentation 35 form 35 prototype 34 generator 31 fixtures 31 error 31 helper 30 migration 29 patch 29 scaffold 28 webrick 26 tiny 25 oracle 25 adapter 25 session 25 has_many 24 tested 24 inflector 23 docs 23 date 23 javascript 23 find 22 postgres 22 schema 22 url_for 22 has_and_belongs_to_many 21 sortable 20 unverified Most of these aren''t worth describing - they just refer to the topic of the ticket, and in some cases are redundant with the component or other settings of the ticket. It looks like there are only a few keywords that matter: fd, needs_review, test, documentation/docs, tiny, tested I suppose "patch" might deserve to be on that list too, though it''s redundant with the [PATCH] notation in the summary field. If no one has any others to offer, I''ll go with that list. thanks --josh On May 15, 2006, at 8:25 PM, Hampton wrote:> I''m stepping out there to day this. There are obviously keywords which > are re-used time and time again and perhaps could be put in an > official list. > However, I''m not surprised that people are not jumping towards > codifying > the keywords list into a strict guildline. If you want to give the > new users > advice, then grab the most popular ones you see and write some > description. Making keywords "official" at this point is probably > overkill, but not so > far in the future as to be useless. > > > or should I just tell potential contributors to ignore them? > > I think that''s overkill. How about, "If you notice your patch being > ignored > or want to mark it for attention, then please use sensible keywords > when creating a patch or bug listing. > > How does that work? > > -hampton. > > On 5/15/06, Josh Susser < josh@hasmanythrough.com> wrote:Trying > this again, since it was ignored last time (May 10). I''ve had > over 1700 downloads of the PDF slides from my presentation. Would be > nice to include the keyword list in the update I''m putting together > now. Is there any interest in using keywords on tickets, or should I > just tell potential contributors to ignore them? > > ------------- > In putting together my talk about contributing to Rails, I realized I > couldn''t find any write-up anywhere of what keywords are used for > tickets in Trac. It seems that people just put any old keywords on > tickets, sort of like tagging photos in flickr. But I know there are > at least a few keywords that matter, like "docs" and perhaps "tiny", > and ones used at release time like "needs_review". Does someone know > of a standard list? If not, would it be possible to put our noggins > together and come up with a list of keywords that the core team cares > about? >-- Josh Susser http://blog.hasmanythrough.com
Marcel Molina Jr.
2006-May-16 17:09 UTC
Re: resend: is there a list of standard keywords in trac?
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 11:46:13PM -0700, Josh Susser wrote:> Most of these aren''t worth describing - they just refer to the topic > of the ticket, and in some cases are redundant with the component or > other settings of the ticket. It looks like there are only a few > keywords that matter: > > fd, needs_review, test, documentation/docs, tiny, tested > > I suppose "patch" might deserve to be on that list too, though it''s > redundant with the [PATCH] notation in the summary field. > > If no one has any others to offer, I''ll go with that list.Those are indeed about the only keywords that have an ordained significance. There isn''t really a rigorous list. Some keywords are only to be assigned by core though. One example is ''fd''. There is also the ''risky'' keyword (http://dev.rubyonrails.org/report/18). Basically, if there isn''t a customized report for the keyword here (http://dev.rubyonrails.org/report) then the keyword will likely not be used much. No need for a patch keyword. [PATCH] does the job. The keywords are a way to organize [PATCH]es. Thanks for your efforts Josh. marcel -- Marcel Molina Jr. <marcel@vernix.org>