GitHub Labels overhaul

Discussion about the project in general, organization, website, or any other details that aren't directly about the game.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

GitHub Labels overhaul

#1 Post by Vezzra » Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:45 am

Someone (my bet is on Marcel ;)) has reworked the labels on github, and I consider the results a big improvement, so thumbs up! :D

I have one tiny little complaint though: Marcel, it looks like you renamed the "enhancement" label into "category:refactoring" - I don't think that this really fits the original label. The "enhancement" label was used for a wide variety of things, a lot of which probably would fall under "refactoring", but certainly not all. E.g. a PR adding a new species has also been labeled "enhancement", which has nothing to do with "refactoring". So I propose to rename "category:refactoring" to "category:enhancement", add "category:refactoring" as a new label and replace "category:enhancement" with "category:refactoring" at all issues/PRs where you think "refactoring" fits better.

User avatar
adrian_broher
Programmer
Posts: 1072
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Germany

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#2 Post by adrian_broher » Mon Aug 22, 2016 2:39 pm

Someone (my bet is on Marcel ;)) has reworked the labels on github, and I consider the results a big improvement, so thumbs up! :D
Yeah, I'm guilty on that. I found the previous tagging 'concept' very annoying and saw this on another git project. Sorry for not at least notifying the team to this, but this 'shooting from the hip'-work style is just very hard for me to overcome.
Vezzra wrote:I have one tiny little complaint though: Marcel, it looks like you renamed the "enhancement" label into "category:refactoring" - I don't think that this really fits the original label. The "enhancement" label was used for a wide variety of things, a lot of which probably would fall under "refactoring", but certainly not all.
Well, the first time the label was introduced (I don't remember who added it) I always though of this as 'refactoring' and tagging refactoring issues most of the time like this. But looking at the actual tagging I don't know if the term 'enhancement' was chosen well and isn't just to broad. There are issues that were tagged as enhancement but are a bug/bugfix, or features that are were tagged as enhancement. There will never be issues that are intentional 'dehancements'. Your example of a new species I would classify as 'feature' but while labeling issues I found some issues that can't be labeled properly, so I'm open for suggestions what to use instead of 'enhancement' (or keeping it as is).
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

User avatar
adrian_broher
Programmer
Posts: 1072
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Germany

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#3 Post by adrian_broher » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:15 pm

From https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... -242174547
Vezzra wrote:@adrianbroher: Not related to this PR per se, just taking it as an example: what category to use for this? It's not a refactoring or bug, and to label this as feature doesn't really fit IMO. It's more something like an extension/enhancement of an already existing thing, in this case the Dump function of the System class.

Personally I'd prefer to use "enhancement" for this kind of things. That ok with you, or would you prefer something else?
Well, good question. I would say it's a feature as it adds something to the application (features don't need to be user facing according to my interpretation).
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12268
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#4 Post by Geoff the Medio » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:24 pm

I'd think a "feature" should be user-visible, or at least content-scripter visible. A small bit more detail in a rarely-used dump function is not a feature, or even is a dump function. It's something used mostly internally to support other work / code / development.

This could be "engine internals", though I'm not sure about calling it an "engine"...

User avatar
adrian_broher
Programmer
Posts: 1072
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Germany

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#5 Post by adrian_broher » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:33 pm

Geoff the Medio wrote:I'd think a "feature" should be user-visible, or at least content-scripter visible. A small bit more detail in a rarely-used dump function is not a feature, or even is a dump function. It's something used mostly internally to support other work / code / development.

This could be "engine internals", though I'm not sure about calling it an "engine"...
Is there anything wrong with just "internals"? Otherwise I think this is a good suggestion for any non-user-facing feature.
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#6 Post by Vezzra » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:43 pm

It would not distinguish between something that is a new addition and something that is an enhancement/extension of an existing thing, but for stuff labelled "internal" that probably isn't necessary/desired. So I guess "internals" is just fine.

Morlic
AI Contributor
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:54 am

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#7 Post by Morlic » Wed Aug 31, 2016 1:44 am

Regarding AI logic changes which are not exactly "features" but mostly "tweaking" of existing stuff, e.g. changing research order or changing some weighting/rating function, adding some details to consider etc.
What label is appropriate for that kind of changes? "Feature" seems far stretched if changes are minor. I would interpret that label as adding a new functionality not tweaking some existing one.

For balance fixes in game content etc. "category: Balancing" seems fair and easy enough. Not sure how the corresponding AI label could be named precisely. "AI logic" is kind of redundant with "component: AI" and I guess too specific... "Enhancement" seemed to kind of cover that stuff nicely. "Tweak" would also work but is just as nondescript.

Any better ideas?
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

dbenage-cx
Programmer
Posts: 389
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:08 am

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#8 Post by dbenage-cx » Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:43 am

Some list of definitions for the differing labels would be greatly appreciated.
Specifically the components common, infrastructure and internal are not clearly different to me (even with the previous discussion on internal).

User avatar
adrian_broher
Programmer
Posts: 1072
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Germany

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#9 Post by adrian_broher » Mon Oct 03, 2016 1:01 pm

Added a PR with at least some documentation. It probably only answers only your question regarding infrastructure, dbenage-cx. A review from everybody would be appreciated.
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

dbenage-cx
Programmer
Posts: 389
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:08 am

Re: GitHub Labels overhaul

#10 Post by dbenage-cx » Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:00 pm

Thank you very much, it is a big help.

Post Reply