Re: [FFmpeg-devel] forgejo labels

[Timo Rothenpieler <timo@rothenpieler.org>]

On 7/28/2025 4:40 PM, Diederick C. Niehorster wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 4:21 PM Michael Niedermayer
> <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> regression: issue aaddresses a regression
>> bug:        something is not working
>>
>> This is inconsistent
>> Label X cannot sometimes mean "X is removed" and "X is added"
>>
>> bug seems meaning that the PR adds a bug
>> regression seems meaning that the PR removes a regression
>>
>> IMO this should be done consistently
>> a PR can have bugs and it can fix bugs
>> a PR can cause regressions and it can fix regressions
> 
> so lets rename the labels to bug_fix, regression_fix and add has_bug
> and has_regression. The former two colored green, the latter two
> colored red.
> 
> Issues also need labels, and there "bug" and "regression" are fine,
> indicating that an issue flags a bug instead of, e.g., a feature
> request (and applying bug+regression makes sense).

Every PR is also an issue, labels apply to both.
So for an issue, the label would imply that it reports a bug or 
regression, and for a PR that it fixes it respectively.

Having two split labels for that seems a little unnecessary.

Or we could just not use the bug/regession label on PRs, cause they do 
seem kinda off there.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".