Hi Gyan

On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 04:26:53PM +0530, Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2025-09-24 03:20 am, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > Hi Gyan
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:09:14AM +0530, Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 2025-09-16 03:16 am, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> > > > And what do we gain by avoiding "wholesale migration" ?
> > > Added bloat of thousands of dormant issues marked as open, many of which are
> > > invalid after these many years.
> > This is not an accurate description of the situation
> > 
> > If you look at trac, there are
> >   690    open tickets
> >   176    reopened tickets
> > 2307    new tickets
> > 5033    fixed tickets
> > 1751    invalid tickets
> >   280    wont fix tickets
> >   565    duplicate tickets
> >   266    non reproduceable tickets
> >   593    tickets waiting for user input
> > 
> > What you can see here, is there are only 690 open tickets, that is not thousands
> 
> The oldest 'new' ticket is from 2013, so that label is misleading.

They are "new" in the sense that they have not been categorized between
valid+open and invalid+closed

We can categorize them, we can also automatically change their status/resolution
But they should be migrated to the new tracker if we choose a new tracker IMO


> By open,
> I meant unresolved tickets so that includes open + reopened + new + waiting
> for user input = 690 + 176 + 2307 + 593 = 3766 tickets.

> > there are also 593 Tickets marked as needs_more_input,
> > these should not end on a read only system
> 
> It should be possible to revive them but on a case-by-case basis.

That is only possible, if we have a volunteer to do that. Iam not sure
who that would be.


> The oldest
> 'needs_more_info' ticket #228 has its last activity in Dec 2013. There's no
> point in blindly migrating such tickets wholesale.

#228 closed
are there other tickets which have incorrect status or resoluton ?

if so, we should fix that.
There is value in going over these old tickets. And cleaning it up


> Maybe it's possible to
> add a banner on trac so that when someone lands on a ticket, the banner
> tells them where they can open a new issue (on F) to report a brand-new
> issue or continue a trac ticket. A few of us can have permissions to update
> trac so that we can add a link to F if a ticket is revived. trac can then
> become read-only for the rest.

Again, we have no volunteer to do any of this.
If we do then she can already now go over new tickets and change them to
open or closed. Similar for other tickets that have the wrong status/resolution


thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad
people will find a way around the laws. -- Plato