#17 List of Gogs features that will be missing with a switch to Pagure

Open
opened 8 years ago by zPlus · 5 comments
zPlus commented 8 years ago

"missing" because they probably won't be implemented anytime soon

  • wikis
  • repo stars
  • follow users
"missing" because they probably won't be implemented anytime soon - wikis - repo stars - follow users
bill-auger commented 8 years ago
Owner

im not sure what is the usefulness of this consolidated list

if these are desired features then they should be added separately as individual feature requests

for example there already exists a feature request issue for wikis --> NotABug.org/notabug#14

im not sure what is the usefulness of this consolidated list if these are desired features then they should be added separately as individual feature requests for example there already exists a feature request issue for wikis --> https://notabug.org/NotABug.org/notabug/issues/14
zPlus commented 8 years ago
Poster

These are not necessarily desired features (for me at least). I just opened this to have a list of features that users are using right now on NAB, and that will likely not have anymore with Pagure.

There could be some important features that users expect to retain with the switch, and that they might lose instead.

These are not necessarily desired features (for me at least). I just opened this to have a list of features that users are using right now on NAB, and that will likely not have anymore with Pagure. There could be some important features that users expect to retain with the switch, and that they might lose instead.
bill-auger commented 8 years ago
Owner

i think your main point is that indeed there would be some information loss if these features are not re-implemented but if they are not desired then they are not worth mentioning - it is good that someone has noted them for that reason but if they are desirable then they should have their own feature request issue such as the one for namespaced repos - that is essentially just a proposal to re-implement a feature that would otherwise be lost (much like the ones listed here) but is elevated to critical status by having a dedicated issue tied to a milestone

so any important feature of this sort where data will be lost should be elevated to critical by having a dedicated issue tied to a milestone or they could be considered non-essential and their associated data may be discarded or at least interrupted

i think your main point is that indeed there would be some information loss if these features are not re-implemented but if they are not desired then they are not worth mentioning - it is good that someone has noted them for that reason but if they are desirable then they should have their own feature request issue such as the one for namespaced repos - that is essentially just a proposal to re-implement a feature that would otherwise be lost (much like the ones listed here) but is elevated to critical status by having a dedicated issue tied to a milestone so any important feature of this sort where data will be lost should be elevated to critical by having a dedicated issue tied to a milestone or they could be considered non-essential and their associated data may be discarded or at least interrupted
zPlus commented 8 years ago
Poster

ok fair enough

ok fair enough
bill-auger commented 8 years ago
Owner

maybe we should leave this open for discussion - maybe someone wants these features

maybe we should leave this open for discussion - maybe someone wants these features
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No assignee
2 Participants
Loading...
Cancel
Save
There is no content yet.