Is this related to Phorge itself?

I mean, is this related to we.phorge.it?

In T15130#3881, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

I mean, is this related to we.phorge.it?

Yes

I honestly don't like the sub-project approach because it is nearly impossible for web users to move things as sub-project, or move them out of sub-project. So I do not encourage it until this feature is stable enough to allow community contributions in this direction. And this is needed, since the purpose of Phorge is not to prepare the ground for volunteers, but to get help from volunteers.

I've killed all the stuff from under Phorge, and I'm starting on some of the top-level redundancies (such as Typeahead and typehead, and at least 3 different projects for php 8 support!)

@Cigaryno wtf?

Just a clarification:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/5132/

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/php_8.2_support/

etc.

I don't think it's a bug, but a feature.

@valerio.bozzolan what?

In T15130#5784, @avivey wrote:

I'm starting on some of the top-level redundancies (such as ..., and at least 3 different projects for php 8 support!)

I just tried to be nice and don't put everything under a tag "PHP 8", just like some other organizations are doing:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/5132/

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/4107/

etc.

Just visit the above links to understand why it may be useful to do so.

ah

For our codebase, it's enough to have a single "8.x" tag. We have several millions lines of code less then wikimedia.

In T15130#5788, @avivey wrote:

@Cigaryno wtf?

The project Phorge no longer has subprojects. We will leave this task open as a feature request.

In T15130#5794, @avivey wrote:

ah

For our codebase, it's enough to have a single "8.x" tag. We have several millions lines of code less then wikimedia.

No problem, I agree.

@Cigaryno Phorge was only part of "organize projects here" task.

In T15130#5798, @avivey wrote:

@Cigaryno Phorge was only part of "organize projects here" task.

Yeah, I know so let's mark this as a feature request.

I'm also the author of the first table here in the Change Log:

2023 Week 2

I thought it was useful to mention the core topic for end-users. But now is becoming nuked after these archiviations.

Edited: sorry - wrong link

Adding lots of projects makes it harder to find the right project for a given thing.

For php, eg, having a column for "8.2" under "php 8" is plenty detailed enough.

I disagree: I strongly suggest to keep the ability to use Projects as Tags. One problem is Mobile that affects mobile users, but it's not related to a particular area of interest like Diffusion. Also, Files (archived) , I don't agree on archiving it, since having that Tag dramatically simplifies searching for that specific topic on a search engine.

If one topic has multiple tags, is just easier to find it. Not less difficult. It's just a matter of having clear Projects for components) and Projects for topic Tags.

In T15130#5812, @avivey wrote:

For php, eg, having a column for "8.2" under "php 8" is plenty detailed enough.

I don't think so, but I understand it. In the future just ask, and I will clean that for you.

In T15130#5813, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

I disagree: I strongly suggest to keep the ability to use Projects as Tags. One problem is Mobile that affects mobile users, but it's not related to a particular area of interest like Diffusion. Also, Files (archived) , I don't agree on archiving it, since having that Tag dramatically simplifies searching for that specific topic on a search engine.

If one topic has multiple tags, is just easier to find it. Not less difficult. It's just a matter of having clear Projects for components) and Projects for topic Tags.

We will keep using projects as tags.

I archived Files (archived) because there was nothing there.
If it gets traffic, we can create a relevant tag.

There's no reason to create projects/tag on the off-case that "we might need this some day".

In T15130#5832, @avivey wrote:

I archived Files (archived) because there was nothing there.
If it gets traffic, we can create a relevant tag.

There's no reason to create projects/tag on the off-case that "we might need this some day".

It's true. I also saw your message in Z1: Phorge.

In T15130#5832, @avivey wrote:

I archived Files (archived) because there was nothing there.

Sorry if I correct this assumption:

https://we.phorge.it/project/board/25/query/all/

The Tag is populated. This is the filter with all Tasks, also closed ones. It contains 6 Tasks. It's useful to use a Tag to find old topics. Since Phorge is also a documentation tool to document internal closed processes. Also, the topic "Files" will never be concluded even without opened Tasks.

We have a really good text-search system. Just go to maniphest and search for "files", you'll get everything that's related to it.

@avivey, @valerio.bozzolan this is not a place to discuss Files (archived).

Avivey I understand your point of view, but please understand that it's really not feasible to look for "files" in the search engine, since we know in the IT everything is a file. Instead, just allowing people to click on a Tag and see some Tasks that are really related to what most looking is looking for (Files component), it's useful.

Generally I would suggest to somehow avoid preemptive cleanups only because one single person disagrees with a topic Tag, without a discussion.

Edited: sorry Cigaryno I wrote this after your message

I'm ok with you creating a new Files tag for the Files app.

As a rule, if a tag would only have 1 or 2 tasks in it, there's no need for the tag, and creating a new project only adds noise.

I'm done cleaning up Projects for now.

I'm still confused. I noticed that the Projects (archived) was archived since probably it was a sub-project, but why also Projects was emptied? It's a core component of Phorge, and it contained more than 3-4 Tasks inside (so, inside the avivey rule of thumb mentioned above). In this way I just feel like am I bothering you, just for trying to organize a massive work on a community project?

Projects isn't archived.

I removed the tag from some tasks that are about Workboards and not about projects.

OK thanks, so I understand what was the last cleanup: you helped in removing some Projects where was related to Workboard and #Milestones but the last one does not exist.

Yeah sorry, I mis-used Projects since I was not bold enough to mark more appropriately with #Milestones (that we know are a type of Project internally)