[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Issue tracker

[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 987 bytes --]

Hi everyone

trac supports, custom search queries, customly formated results

People can vote on tickets, we can have custom ticket states and custom
workflow on tickets.

Are these things possible in forgejo ?

For example, what we use in trac:

Open Tickets ordered by number of votes colored based on priorty
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/11

Non Developer tickets:
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/15

Open and New tickets sorted by priority:
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/1

Closed Tickts showing the resolution (needs_more_info, fixed, invalid, wontfix) sorted by last modification:
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=closed&order=changetime&desc=1&col=id&col=summary&col=type&col=component&col=resolution&col=changetime

thx

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Some people wanted to paint the bikeshed green, some blue and some pink.
People argued and fought, when they finally agreed, only rust was left.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3086 bytes --]

Hi all

ATM the bug reporting guidlines point to trac
and https://trac.ffmpeg.org/newticket redirects to forgejo

So if a user found a bug, now what does she do?
1. First she (maybe) looks at the bug reporting guidlines (which point to trac)
2. and she registers on trac
3. she maybe searches for existing tickets on trac, and maybe adds her info there
4. she tries to open a new ticket on trac and gets redirected to forgejo
5a. she refuses to register on a 2nd tracker and leaves
5b. she registers on forgejo
6. she searches for an existing report on forgejo and maybe adds her bug info there
7. she opens a new ticket on forgejo

lets summarize, what is wrong here
0. I think many people are/where unaware of the newticket redirect (I was unaware until very recently)
1. I think some of the consequences of this regirect where missed
2. the bug tracker was half switched to forgejo
3. users have to register on 2 trackers (they may need to add comments on either)
4. users have to search bugs on 2 trackers (both if they want to open a new one and also
    if they are just looking for one)
5. forgejo lacks some nice features like searching per number of votes

So what are we going to do now ?
T. Undo the half move and stay with trac, move or loose 61+32 tickets from forgejo to trac
F. Fully move from trac to forgejo, move 3176+8501 tickets from trac to forgejo
D. have some tickets in trac and some in forgejo, require users to register and search both
?. something else ?


Ideas, Comments ?

thx


On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 11:23:17PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi everyone
> 
> trac supports, custom search queries, customly formated results
> 
> People can vote on tickets, we can have custom ticket states and custom
> workflow on tickets.
> 
> Are these things possible in forgejo ?
> 
> For example, what we use in trac:
> 
> Open Tickets ordered by number of votes colored based on priorty
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/11
> 
> Non Developer tickets:
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/15
> 
> Open and New tickets sorted by priority:
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report/1
> 
> Closed Tickts showing the resolution (needs_more_info, fixed, invalid, wontfix) sorted by last modification:
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=closed&order=changetime&desc=1&col=id&col=summary&col=type&col=component&col=resolution&col=changetime
> 
> thx
> 
> -- 
> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
> 
> Some people wanted to paint the bikeshed green, some blue and some pink.
> People argued and fought, when they finally agreed, only rust was left.



> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org


-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Complexity theory is the science of finding the exact solution to an
approximation. Benchmarking OTOH is finding an approximation of the exact

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4188 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 01:09:47PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> ATM the bug reporting guidlines point to trac
> and https://trac.ffmpeg.org/newticket redirects to forgejo
> 
> So if a user found a bug, now what does she do?
> 1. First she (maybe) looks at the bug reporting guidlines (which point to trac)
> 2. and she registers on trac
> 3. she maybe searches for existing tickets on trac, and maybe adds her info there
> 4. she tries to open a new ticket on trac and gets redirected to forgejo
> 5a. she refuses to register on a 2nd tracker and leaves
> 5b. she registers on forgejo
> 6. she searches for an existing report on forgejo and maybe adds her bug info there
> 7. she opens a new ticket on forgejo
> 
> lets summarize, what is wrong here
> 0. I think many people are/where unaware of the newticket redirect (I was unaware until very recently)
> 1. I think some of the consequences of this regirect where missed
> 2. the bug tracker was half switched to forgejo
> 3. users have to register on 2 trackers (they may need to add comments on either)
> 4. users have to search bugs on 2 trackers (both if they want to open a new one and also
>     if they are just looking for one)
> 5. forgejo lacks some nice features like searching per number of votes
> 
> So what are we going to do now ?
> T. Undo the half move and stay with trac, move or loose 61+32 tickets from forgejo to trac
> F. Fully move from trac to forgejo, move 3176+8501 tickets from trac to forgejo
> D. have some tickets in trac and some in forgejo, require users to register and search both
> ?. something else ?
> 
> 
> Ideas, Comments ?

Some brainstorming, potential steps that someone may need to do

for T,
    phase 0:
     + forgejos new ticket page should redirect to trac instead of trac to forgejo
       or the page should explain the use of forgejo vs trac
    phase 1
     + some or all of the 93 tickets should be moved to trac
       (if all then forgejos issue tracker can be disabled)
    phase 2:
     + we need to investigate some scalability issues. We have one admin page
       that takes a really long time to load. It sometimes times out but seems
       working ATM. But as users, tickets and sessions grow we will likely at
       some point become unable to load this page without increasing timeouts
       at webserver and browser. Timo has already spend time on
       updating things, switching database and so on. So really solving this,
       may involve becoming active in development on trac itself

for F,
    phase 0:
     + bugreporting guide needs update
     + tracs new ticket page should explain the transition and link to forgejo
       not just redirect (it confuses users especially if the bugreporting guide just
       pointed them to trac)
    phase 1:
     + 11696 tickets need to be moved into forgejo with their metadata (creation
       date, authors, comments, state, resolution, number, keywords, html and git links,
       CC, attachments) or we need to accept to loose this data in a searchable way
     + keywords -> labels ?
     + per ticket redirects to forgejo
    phase 2:
     + wiki needs to be transitioned to forgejo, ideally with history or we need
       to keep the wiki in trac and disable in forgejo
     + per wiki page redirects to forgejo
    phase 3:
     + trac shutdown
     + landing page (register & new) redirect to forgejo

    note, we also serve trac.mplayerhq.hu

for D,
    + bugreporting guide needs update
    + both trackers search and register pages need to point to the other too
      so the users know that they need to search both trackers
    + or hire some web UI developer and have her write a meta search
      that searches both trakers

thx


[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Dictatorship: All citizens are under surveillance, all their steps and
actions recorded, for the politicians to enforce control.
Democracy: All politicians are under surveillance, all their steps and
actions recorded, for the citizens to enforce control.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel]

On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> ATM the bug reporting guidlines point to trac
> and https://trac.ffmpeg.org/newticket redirects to forgejo
> 
> So if a user found a bug, now what does she do?
> 1. First she (maybe) looks at the bug reporting guidlines (which point to trac)
> 2. and she registers on trac
> 3. she maybe searches for existing tickets on trac, and maybe adds her info there
> 4. she tries to open a new ticket on trac and gets redirected to forgejo
> 5a. she refuses to register on a 2nd tracker and leaves
> 5b. she registers on forgejo
> 6. she searches for an existing report on forgejo and maybe adds her bug info there
> 7. she opens a new ticket on forgejo
> 
> lets summarize, what is wrong here
> 0. I think many people are/where unaware of the newticket redirect (I was unaware until very recently)
> 1. I think some of the consequences of this regirect where missed
> 2. the bug tracker was half switched to forgejo
> 3. users have to register on 2 trackers (they may need to add comments on either)
> 4. users have to search bugs on 2 trackers (both if they want to open a new one and also
>      if they are just looking for one)
> 5. forgejo lacks some nice features like searching per number of votes
> 
> So what are we going to do now ?
> T. Undo the half move and stay with trac, move or loose 61+32 tickets from forgejo to trac
> F. Fully move from trac to forgejo, move 3176+8501 tickets from trac to forgejo
> D. have some tickets in trac and some in forgejo, require users to register and search both
> ?. something else ?
> 
> 
> Ideas, Comments ?

I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.
It can stick around in read-only mode indefinitely, eventually turned 
into a dump of static HTML pages. But it's not a software that we can 
keep supporting forever.

I thought Forgejo had votes as well, but I can't find them anymore, so I 
might be misremembering that.
But the usual issue conclusions are represented via labels, and they do 
exist. And have been used for that purpose already.
Not sure I'd really want to stick with hard to maintain trac just for 
voting on issues. If we really want that, it'd probably easier to 
contribute that feature to Forgejo.

I'm also not a fan of migrating issues, since the migrates one are 
always going to be horribly ugly, basically just consisting of one big 
quote posted by a bot account.
It is possible to do though, so if that's desired instead of keeping 
trac itself around, I can look into it.

So my preferred solution is to just keep the two separated, disable new 
tickets on trac, and at some point in the distant future make trac fully 
read-only/turn it into static HTML pages.

Forgejo already back-references trac issues when they're tagged 
somewhere on the FFmpeg/FFmpeg repo, hence all the new issues/PRs start 
at 20000.
If we really kept using trac that would also eventually clash and then 
really make a huge mess.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1897 bytes --]

Hi

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
[...]

> 
> I thought Forgejo had votes as well, but I can't find them anymore, so I
> might be misremembering that.

One can add thumbs up and down to individual messages of an issue but they
are not shown in the search results or searchable as far as i can see

In fact the whole search capability in Forgejo is disappointing
even searching for open (not new) tickets doesnt work as documented
(one cannot disable "new" lables by alt + mouse click it works by
 alt + keyboard click)


> But the usual issue conclusions are represented via labels, and they do
> exist. And have been used for that purpose already.
> Not sure I'd really want to stick with hard to maintain trac just for voting
> on issues. If we really want that, it'd probably easier to contribute that
> feature to Forgejo.
> 

> I'm also not a fan of migrating issues, since the migrates one are always
> going to be horribly ugly, basically just consisting of one big quote posted
> by a bot account.
> It is possible to do though, so if that's desired instead of keeping trac
> itself around, I can look into it.

Naively, i would have thought that issue migration would be done by a
Database -> Database thing

but there are many shades of this

one could leave issues in trac and instead extend Forgejos search so it
simply in addition to what it does also have it run a sql querry
in the trac db and simply return links to the trac tickets

this actually feels like quite doable for someone knowing Forgejo
and also the trac db layout. (that is not me)

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel]

On 15/09/2025 14:30, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> [...]
> 
>>
>> I thought Forgejo had votes as well, but I can't find them anymore, so I
>> might be misremembering that.
> 
> One can add thumbs up and down to individual messages of an issue but they
> are not shown in the search results or searchable as far as i can see
> 
> In fact the whole search capability in Forgejo is disappointing
> even searching for open (not new) tickets doesnt work as documented
> (one cannot disable "new" lables by alt + mouse click it works by
>   alt + keyboard click)
> 
> 
>> But the usual issue conclusions are represented via labels, and they do
>> exist. And have been used for that purpose already.
>> Not sure I'd really want to stick with hard to maintain trac just for voting
>> on issues. If we really want that, it'd probably easier to contribute that
>> feature to Forgejo.
>>
> 
>> I'm also not a fan of migrating issues, since the migrates one are always
>> going to be horribly ugly, basically just consisting of one big quote posted
>> by a bot account.
>> It is possible to do though, so if that's desired instead of keeping trac
>> itself around, I can look into it.
> 
> Naively, i would have thought that issue migration would be done by a
> Database -> Database thing

Yeah, that's how I'd do it as well. But every actual reply to an issue 
needs to be associated to a user, and spamming our user DB with 
thousands of users just for the migration isn't great.

> but there are many shades of this
> 
> one could leave issues in trac and instead extend Forgejos search so it
> simply in addition to what it does also have it run a sql querry
> in the trac db and simply return links to the trac tickets

I doubt Forgejo would accept that as a contribution, and I do not really 
want to start maintaining a fork of Forgejo for our instance.

> this actually feels like quite doable for someone knowing Forgejo
> and also the trac db layout. (that is not me)

It'd need to be done in some generic way so that any arbitrary issue 
tracker can be hooked up like that. So it's quite a bit of work.

> thx
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 812 bytes --]

Hi

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
[...]
> > Ideas, Comments ?
> 
> I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.

btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
Its a quite capable issue tracker ...

also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
for importing trac ?

Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

When you are offended at any man's fault, turn to yourself and study your
own failings. Then you will forget your anger. -- Epictetus

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1042 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:57:53PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> [...]
> > > Ideas, Comments ?
> > 
> > I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.
> 
> btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
> Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
> 
> also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
> for importing trac ?
> 
> Have we considered redmine as alternative ?

> If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother

smoother solution (iam missing words in my sentances)


[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not
or of what sort they may be, because of the obscurity of the subject, and
the brevity of human life -- Protagoras

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1210 bytes --]

On 9/15/2025 2:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> [...]
>>> Ideas, Comments ?
>>
>> I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.
> 
> btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
> Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
> 
> also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
> for importing trac ?
> 
> Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
> If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother

redmine is apparently a "trac clone written in ruby".
No idea if it's database-compatible, or just similar idea but full 
re-implementation.

But really, I don't see how in the long run a separate issue tracker 
from Forgejo makes sense.
The issue IDs will eventually clash, and integration and linking between 
them will be a right mess.

Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.

I never had issues with the Forgejo Issue search. What exactly is 
broken/missing? Fixing/enhancing those things is usually pretty easy.

[-- Attachment #1.2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4742 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2696 bytes --]

Hi Timo

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 07:19:17PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 9/15/2025 2:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > Ideas, Comments ?
> > > 
> > > I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.
> > 
> > btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
> > Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
> > 
> > also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
> > for importing trac ?
> > 
> > Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
> > If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother
> 
> redmine is apparently a "trac clone written in ruby".
> No idea if it's database-compatible, or just similar idea but full
> re-implementation.
> 

> But really, I don't see how in the long run a separate issue tracker from
> Forgejo makes sense.
> The issue IDs will eventually clash, and integration and linking between
> them will be a right mess.

the mix of trac and Forgejo is already a mess if theres no _clean_
way to import the tickets
We would always have 15 years of ticket history outside our issue tracker

if you really want to have pull requests and issues have distinct positive numbers
well, make one even and the other odd above the value where they would clash
so it would be
0..20k Trac
20k-25k Forgejo
25k+ even Forgejo
25k+ odd redmine


> 
> Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.

redmine can accept OAuth2/OIDC logins via plugins IIUC
would need to be tested in a test setup but there seems support for shared
accounts in principle


> 
> I never had issues with the Forgejo Issue search. What exactly is
> broken/missing? Fixing/enhancing those things is usually pretty easy.

1. It doesnt show the number of thumbs up / down in the search result
2. I cannot sort based on the thumbs up / down
3. on the labels it says "Use Alt + Click to exclude labels", this does not work
   alt-shift-click works, alt click doesnt, alt-enter works
   it may be that alt-click is interpreted by browser or by some other component
   but either way it doesnt work, the user will not care why it doesnt work, its
   bad UI
4. it does not search in the 15 years of tickets from trac

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny 
individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2538 bytes --]

On 9/15/2025 8:26 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi Timo
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 07:19:17PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> On 9/15/2025 2:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>>> On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> Ideas, Comments ?
>>>>
>>>> I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually retire it.
>>>
>>> btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
>>> Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
>>>
>>> also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
>>> for importing trac ?
>>>
>>> Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
>>> If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother
>>
>> redmine is apparently a "trac clone written in ruby".
>> No idea if it's database-compatible, or just similar idea but full
>> re-implementation.
>>
> 
>> But really, I don't see how in the long run a separate issue tracker from
>> Forgejo makes sense.
>> The issue IDs will eventually clash, and integration and linking between
>> them will be a right mess.
> 
> the mix of trac and Forgejo is already a mess if theres no _clean_
> way to import the tickets
> We would always have 15 years of ticket history outside our issue tracker
> 
> if you really want to have pull requests and issues have distinct positive numbers
> well, make one even and the other odd above the value where they would clash
> so it would be
> 0..20k Trac
> 20k-25k Forgejo
> 25k+ even Forgejo
> 25k+ odd redmine

That is not something that can be done, and honestly seems a bit silly 
to me.

> 
>>
>> Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.
> 
> redmine can accept OAuth2/OIDC logins via plugins IIUC
> would need to be tested in a test setup but there seems support for shared
> accounts in principle
I honestly don't understand the insistence on an external issue tracker.
That just makes things more complex for no real reason.

And I also firmly disagree about the current setup being "a mess".
With no new tickets being allowed on trac, its quite the opposite of that.
If issues/tickets could be opened on both, then it'd be a mess.
This way it's just a migration.

And the tickets on trac won't go away, so no history will be lost.
If you really want, I can import them all into Forgejo, but _that_ will 
be horribly messy.

[-- Attachment #1.2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4742 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel]

On 2025-09-16 12:05 am, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 9/15/2025 8:26 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> Hi Timo
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 07:19:17PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via 
>> ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>> On 9/15/2025 2:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via 
>>>> ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>>>> On 15/09/2025 13:09, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>>> Ideas, Comments ?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do think trac is a dead end software, and we want to eventually 
>>>>> retire it.
>>>>
>>>> btw, anyone knows why the trac project seems dieing / dead ?
>>>> Its a quite capable issue tracker ...
>>>>
>>>> also how is it related to redmine, which seems to have some support
>>>> for importing trac ?
>>>>
>>>> Have we considered redmine as alternative ?
>>>> If we could do a full import of trac, this may be a smoother
>>>
>>> redmine is apparently a "trac clone written in ruby".
>>> No idea if it's database-compatible, or just similar idea but full
>>> re-implementation.
>>>
>>
>>> But really, I don't see how in the long run a separate issue tracker 
>>> from
>>> Forgejo makes sense.
>>> The issue IDs will eventually clash, and integration and linking 
>>> between
>>> them will be a right mess.
>>
>> the mix of trac and Forgejo is already a mess if theres no _clean_
>> way to import the tickets
>> We would always have 15 years of ticket history outside our issue 
>> tracker
>>
>> if you really want to have pull requests and issues have distinct 
>> positive numbers
>> well, make one even and the other odd above the value where they 
>> would clash
>> so it would be
>> 0..20k Trac
>> 20k-25k Forgejo
>> 25k+ even Forgejo
>> 25k+ odd redmine
>
> That is not something that can be done, and honestly seems a bit silly 
> to me.
>
>>
>>>
>>> Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.
>>
>> redmine can accept OAuth2/OIDC logins via plugins IIUC
>> would need to be tested in a test setup but there seems support for 
>> shared
>> accounts in principle
> I honestly don't understand the insistence on an external issue tracker.
> That just makes things more complex for no real reason.
>
> And I also firmly disagree about the current setup being "a mess".
> With no new tickets being allowed on trac, its quite the opposite of 
> that.
> If issues/tickets could be opened on both, then it'd be a mess.
> This way it's just a migration.
>
> And the tickets on trac won't go away, so no history will be lost.
> If you really want, I can import them all into Forgejo, but _that_ 
> will be horribly messy.

It's best to have a single issue tracker.
It's best for the issue tracker to be integrated with the code workflow.

What can happen is that if an existing open trac issue is taken up for 
active resolution, then a new issue at Forgejo can be opened, with a 
reference to the trac issue. A comment can be left at trac linking to 
this new Forge issue, so all further activity occurs at code.ffmpeg. 
This would avoid any wholesale migration or duplication.

Regards,
Gyan

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 971 bytes --]

Hi Gyan

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 12:39:37AM +0530, Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel wrote:

> It's best to have a single issue tracker.

+1


> It's best for the issue tracker to be integrated with the code workflow.

+1


> 
> What can happen is that if an existing open trac issue is taken up for
> active resolution, then a new issue at Forgejo can be opened, with a
> reference to the trac issue. A comment can be left at trac linking to this
> new Forge issue, so all further activity occurs at code.ffmpeg. This would
> avoid any wholesale migration or duplication.

It can _IF_ someone spends the extra time and work.
How many people want to do that ?
And how many will do it ?
And what do we gain by avoiding "wholesale migration" ?

thx

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

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being
governed by those who are dumber. -- Plato 

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3435 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 08:35:21PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 9/15/2025 8:26 PM, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
[...]
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Plus the multi-account issue you mentioned.
> > 
> > redmine can accept OAuth2/OIDC logins via plugins IIUC
> > would need to be tested in a test setup but there seems support for shared
> > accounts in principle

> I honestly don't understand the insistence on an external issue tracker.
> That just makes things more complex for no real reason.

It makes things more complex for the admin if there is an external tracker
It makes things easier for the user if there is one tracker instead of 2


> 
> And I also firmly disagree about the current setup being "a mess".
> With no new tickets being allowed on trac, its quite the opposite of that.
> If issues/tickets could be opened on both, then it'd be a mess.
> This way it's just a migration.

simple example. To show a few things that could happen

A user found 2 bugs in the svq1 decoder, what does she do now ?

Before she has to
1. search trac for bugs in the svq1 decoder, she finds the first bug there with two
proposed patches but no sample
2. she registers on trac
3. she uploads the sample and confirms that the first patch fixes it
4. she opens a new report for bug #2

But now after trac->forgejo she has to
1. search trac for bugs in the svq1 decoder, she finds the first bug there with a
proposed patch but no sample
2. she registers on trac
3. she uploads the sample and confirms that the patch fixes it
4. she tries to open a new ticket, but she is redirected to Forgejo
5. she registers on forgejo
6. she searches for the 2 bugs on forgejo, she finds a duplicate of #1
   it links to a unrelated issue on trac or links to none and has been closed and a patch
   which doesnt fix the issue was applied already. A mistake that happened because
   the earlier patch in trac was missed
7. she uploads the sample to forgejo too
8. she reopens the duplicate issue and adds a link to trac explaining that
   the fix in trac was correct. People are confused and just ignore the ticket
   the wrong fix also isnt reverted as noone realized that a wrong fix was applied
   already
9. she searches for the 2nd issue and also doesnt find it on forgejo
10.she opens a issue on forgejo for the 2nd issue
11. she is being asked to please check for duplicates on trac
12. she repeatedly searched trac for the issue and
13. she replies explaining she checked twice and thats a new issue

Its a constructed example but its quite a bit of extra work for everyone
and the outcome in the example is worse, as confusion and mistakes
have lead to the application of a wrong patch


> 
> And the tickets on trac won't go away, so no history will be lost.


> If you really want, I can import them all into Forgejo, but _that_ will be
> horribly messy.

It is largely just basic text with minimal formating, why does this
become messy ?

can we do something about the messyness and have this "not messy" ?

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped 
leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded 
you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership. - Colin Powell

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 163 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org

[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Issue tracker

[Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel]

On 2025-09-16 03:16 am, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> What can happen is that if an existing open trac issue is taken up for
>> active resolution, then a new issue at Forgejo can be opened, with a
>> reference to the trac issue. A comment can be left at trac linking to this
>> new Forge issue, so all further activity occurs at code.ffmpeg. This would
>> avoid any wholesale migration or duplication.
> It can _IF_ someone spends the extra time and work.
> How many people want to do that ?
> And how many will do it ?

There's hardly any extra work.
Open a single issue at forge where the title says, "trac 1234: 
regression in ..."
Add a link to the trac issue in the body.
Post a comment at the trac issue: "continued at 
https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/issues/12345"

Only do this for issues where someone is actively handling the ticket.


> 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.

Regards,
Gyan
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org