FWIW the model of tracking task used in bugzilla often was a tag
replacement. i.e. a never closed task for documentation (infamous bug #1)
with new tickets associated all the time. Most of them were years old and
unclose-able. It was essentially meaningless. That's the thing that is
I think the ideal is that a task has finite work and is eventually closed.
Even if it carries over for months and gets 100 subtasks it is still finite.
No concern for what you want to do here just thought I'd add that
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Kevin Smith <ksmith(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Trey Jones
For autocomplete, what about sticking with a
format: e.g., Discovery-Search-BadWeight.. or they could all get a personal
"_Tag" prefix: _Tag-dcausse-search-badweight. That's super unwieldy, but
avoids autocomplete collisions for everything else.
Autocomplete is per-word, so that sample would come up for dc, sea, bad,
etc. For example, typing "back" in the upper-right search bar brings up all
the xxx-backlog projects.
However, it sounds like we could consider
ignoring the "no tracking
tasks" directive, at least within Discovery. (Now I am advocating going
against the advice given since no one seems to be advocating for it.)
As long as you don't call it a tracking task, I doubt anyone would even
notice in order to complain. If it seems like it would solve the issue, I
would support that. The whole "no tracking tasks" rule seemed to be a
reaction (or over-reaction?) to something going on in bugzilla, so until we
see actual problems in phab, I'm in favor of reasonable experimentation.
discovery mailing list