| Krinkle | |
| Sep 20 2018, 3:17 AM |
| F29455773: Screenshot 2019-06-11 at 15.53.24.png | |
| Jun 11 2019, 3:01 PM |
| F26083661: Screen Shot 2018-09-20 at 04.15.13.png | |
| Sep 20 2018, 3:17 AM |
| F26083687: Screen Shot 2018-09-20 at 04.16.02.png | |
| Sep 20 2018, 3:17 AM |
| F26083679: Screen Shot 2018-09-20 at 04.15.55.png | |
| Sep 20 2018, 3:17 AM |
Because:
and
and
In addition to becoming shorter overall, I'd also propose:
A few contenders to bikeshed over:
3, 4, 2, 1. (branch number is more important than date, but I like - to separate date parts).
OK, no input for a week, I'm picking 3 as the IRV winner. Will implement it for 1.33.0-wmf.1+:
MW-1.33-notes (1.33.0-wmf.1; 2018-10-23)
MW-1.33-notes (1.33.0-wmf.2; 2018-10-30)
MW-1.33-notes (1.33.0-wmf.3; 2018-11-06)
There's one thing I didn't consider, in the project dropdown, Phabricator autocompletes MW-1.XX-notes before MW-1.XX-release except the former is only ever added by bots and humans nearly always want the latter. Is it possible to influence how Phabricator prioritizes projects without renaming?
You or someone else already implemented the chosen winner, though. So this is resolved, right?
The tagging of things for release blockers is indeed slightly harder now, one has to type one additional letter. Previously "MW X.Y", and now "MW X.Y-r".
If that's a blocking issue, I suppose we can keep this open a decision for what word could serve to replace the word "notes" – one that sorts in the alphabet after "release". This restriction eliminates some 70% of starting letters, including the words "alpha", "branch", and "deploy". Some ideas for words starting with RSTUVWXYZ?
| "notes" | MW-1.34-notes (1.34.0-wmf.10; 2019-06-18) – (current) |
| "train" | MW-1.34-train (1.34.0-wmf.10; 2019-06-18) |
| "wmf" | MW-1.34-wmf (1.34.0-wmf.10; 2019-06-18) |
Yes, the main part is done, the question is about naming of the top-level projects. For each major release, we have two, a "notes" main project and a "release blockers" project.
I'm not sure renaming the main project is a good idea – that's not wmf/train specific, anything merged into REL1_33 will get tagged MW-1.33-notes.
The proposal was possibly renaming MW-1.33-release to be differently named so it would be quicker to type and easier to differentiate. Not sure what to call it.