1 What is overyone's idea about the ever-growing list of pages in bugs/ etc.?
2 Once linked to `done`, they're removed from the rendered [[bugs]] page -- but
3 they're still present in the repository.
5 Shouldn't there be some clean-up at some point for those that have been
6 resolved? Or should all of them be kept online forever?
10 > To answer a question with a question, what harm does having the done bugs
11 > around cause? At some point in the future perhaps the number of done pages
12 > will be large enough to be a time or space concern. Do you think we've
13 > reached a point now? One advantage of having them around is that people
14 > running older versions of the Ikiwiki software may find the page explaining
15 > that the bug is fixed if they perform a search. -- [[Jon]]
17 > I like to keep old bugs around. --[[Joey]]
19 So, I guess it depends on whether you want to represent the development of the
20 software (meaning: which bugs are open, which are fixed) *(a)* in a snapshot of
21 the repository (a checkout; that is, what you see rendered on
22 <http://ikiwiki.info/>), or *(b)* if that information is to be contained in the
23 backing repository's revision history only. Both approaches are valid. For
24 people used to using Git for accessing a project's history, *(b)* is what
25 they're used to, but for those poor souls ;-) that only use a web browser to
26 access this database, *(a)* is the more useful approach indeed. For me, using
27 Git, it is a bit of a hindrance, as, when doing a full-text search for a
28 keyword on a checkout, I'd frequently hit pages that reported a bug, but are
29 tagged `done` by now. --[[tschwinge]]