• #Search-Platform - Tag doesn't exist; Alias for #Discovery-Search
• #Discovery/Discovery-ARCHIVED - Is this still used even though there hasn't been a Discovery team since 2017?
• #Discovery-Search/Discovery-Search - What's the difference between this and Discovery?

The Search Platform team needs to have some larger discussions about the use of the term Discovery and the team name. TBD on what to do here.

• #Search-Platform-Programs/Search-Platform-Programs - The description says it's for FY 2017-2018, but it seems to still be in use.

I've archived this project - it's no longer in use.

• #CirrusSearch/CirrusSearch - Description says "Provides Elasticsearch-backed searching." So what's the difference between this and the #Elasticsearch tag?
• #Elasticsearch/Elasticsearch - No description except a link to elastic.co. Is this just for upstream bugs?

@Gehel will update the descriptions on these tags to be clearer.

• #CirrusSearch/CirrusSearch - Description says "Provides Elasticsearch-backed searching." So what's the difference between this and the #Elasticsearch tag?
• #Elasticsearch/Elasticsearch - No description except a link to elastic.co. Is this just for upstream bugs?

Descriptions of the above tags have been updated.

@CBogen: Any idea how to move forward?
There are ~380 open tasks tagged with the obsolete #Discovery tag (see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery ) and not tagged with #Discovery-Search: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/i_TPHKRz09ji/#R , any proposals how to proceed? Thanks!

In T265246#7227090, @Aklapper wrote:

@CBogen: Any idea how to move forward?
There are ~380 open tasks tagged with the obsolete #Discovery tag (see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery ) and not tagged with #Discovery-Search: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/i_TPHKRz09ji/#R , any proposals how to proceed? Thanks!

We are going to go through these in our triage meetings and either close them or tag them with Discovery-Search. It will likely take a few months to get through them all.

In T265246#7227277, @CBogen wrote:

We are going to go through these in our triage meetings and either close them or tag them with Discovery-Search. It will likely take a few months to get through them all.

@CBogen: Any more realistic ETA to share when this will happen? There are still about 350 such open tasks. If not I might just mass-tag with Discovery-Search.

In T265246#8046369, @Aklapper wrote:

In T265246#7227277, @CBogen wrote:

We are going to go through these in our triage meetings and either close them or tag them with Discovery-Search. It will likely take a few months to get through them all.

@CBogen: Any more realistic ETA to share when this will happen? There are still about 350 such open tasks. If not I might just mass-tag with Discovery-Search.

Thanks @Aklapper - sorry for the delay. If you could give us a little more time to plan this, that would be appreciated, since mass-tagging with Discovery-Search will flood our work board. I'll check back in with a realistic date in the next week or two.

In T265246#8052150, @CBogen wrote:

In T265246#8046369, @Aklapper wrote:

In T265246#7227277, @CBogen wrote:

We are going to go through these in our triage meetings and either close them or tag them with Discovery-Search. It will likely take a few months to get through them all.

@CBogen: Any more realistic ETA to share when this will happen? There are still about 350 such open tasks. If not I might just mass-tag with Discovery-Search.

Thanks @Aklapper - sorry for the delay. If you could give us a little more time to plan this, that would be appreciated, since mass-tagging with Discovery-Search will flood our work board. I'll check back in with a realistic date in the next week or two.

@Aklapper, we decided to batch-tag Discovery-ARCHIVED tasks with Discovery-Search and add them to the old-discovery column on the Discovery-Search workboard. We then want to create a herald rule that makes Discovery-ARCHIVED an alias for Discovery-Search.

However, I don't seem to have permissions to create that Herald rule.

Also, though I'm able to batch edit tasks and could easily add the Discovery-Search tag to all open Discovery-ARCHIVED tasks, I don't see a way to batch add them to a specific column on the workboard. Is that possible? Otherwise, individually moving ~350 tasks will be quite time consuming. Thanks!

@CBogen: Hi, thanks for picking this up! Hmm, please help me understand which problem is solved by mass-moving tasks to some "old-discovery" column, instead of triaging the Discovery-ARCHIVED tasks (means: either declining them if nobody shall ever spend time working on a task, or not tagging them with Discovery-Search if only that team does not plan to work on a task but others are welcome to work on a task, or moving them to appropriate columns on the Discovery-Search board)?

@Aklapper , I think the "old-discovery" column solution would allow us to get rid of the Discovery label (which causes confusion). Ideally we would triage all those tickets and close/move/etc them appropriately, but realistically there are far too many to do in a reasonable amount of time (Guillaume try to address old tickets once a week, but can only get through like 1-10/wk, so unless there is some commonality that allows us to bulk close, 350 tickets would take ..a long time). The new "old-discovery" column would create a buffer for us triage them while also allowing getting rid of the label.

Ah, so we're after avoiding confusion when other folks tag tasks. Thanks, I see!
Triaging/tagging the 20 tasks in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/lpG0.CuNByVY/#R and then archiving Discovery-ARCHIVED (so it's not proposed in dropdowns anymore) makes more sense to me. Anyone is still free to go through tasks of Discovery-ARCHIVED after archiving Discovery-ARCHIVED.

Also, does it make sense to have a dedicated project tag for mwgrep tasks? And textcat? Adding correct codebase tags to tasks (and not only the tag of some internal team in one org) would help a lot avoid such situations in the future (also as they allow potential contributors to find tasks in a codebase which they are interested in, and not only some internal team in one org which usually changes over time, like what brought us here).

@CBogen: Can this task be resolved, or is there more work to do?

@Gehel: Could you please answer the last comment? Thanks in advance!