Re: [FFmpeg-devel] forgejo labels

[Timo Rothenpieler <timo@rothenpieler.org>]

On 7/28/2025 7:24 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 06:15:53PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> This sounds reasonable
> 
> 
> [...]
> 
>> 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.
> 
> I dont know, i have only used forgejo for a few days

This is purely convention we want to use, there's no established 
standard for that. Practically every project does something slightly 
different.

>>
>> Or we could just not use the bug/regession label on PRs, cause they do seem
>> kinda off there.
> 
> thats reasonable too, but it probably should then also not be possible to
> select them.

That is not an option, Labels apply to all issues, including PRs.
Probably a valid feature request to post.
_______________________________________________
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".