Thread: Re: Tags in the commitfest app: How to use them and what tags to add?

On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 1:17 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <me@jeltef.nl> wrote:
> The tags that are currently available are some default ones that I
> thought might be useful. If you're missing certain tags or don't like
> the default ones, please respond to this thread. If you have the right
> permissions, you can even create missing tags yourself in the admin
> panel.^1 But if you do, I think it would be useful to post here which
> ones you added for discussion purposes.

Initial thoughts:
- "dblink" seems overly specific compared to the others.
- "Backport" seems strange. That's what the Version column is for, no?
- "Comments Only" feels somehow... standoffish? defensive? How about
"Comments [Requested/Needed]" or something similar?

> ^1: I don't know who can do this, as I myself currently don't have
> that permission, nor the permission to look at permissions...

Hmm, should we grant the CFM group the ability to maintain the tags? I
don't currently have that permission either. (Who added the existing
ones?)

--Jacob

On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 11:52 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <me@jeltef.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 18:29, Jacob Champion
> <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > - "dblink" seems overly specific compared to the others.
>
> It seemed roughly as specific as postgres_fdw to me. Maybe we should
> make sure they are grouped more alphabetically.

Oh, I actually missed that postgres_fdw was in the list. Originally
the tags dropdown menu showed no scrollbar for me, so all I could see
or search were the first six or so... I'm not sure what happened, but
that changed sometime today.

So... we have a lot more tags than I thought we did. I'll have to give
the current list some more thought.

> > - "Backport" seems strange. That's what the Version column is for, no?
>
> I still don't know how I'm supposed to use the version column (e.g.
> what is the difference between stable and pg19), and it seems out of
> date or not filled in half of the time. So I'd rather have it replaced
> with tags with clear intent. Maybe have backport tags for each
> Postgres version instead of "Backport - PG16" etc. The assumption
> being, if it doesn't have a backport tag, then it should go into
> master.

Personally, I would much rather that information be coded separately
from the tags system. I don't want the CF page filled with a bazillion
"Backport - 15" "Backport - 16" "Backport - 17" tags... I'd like the
tags to convey immediately useful information that we can't currently
get somewhere else, and I'd also like them not to rot over time.

> > - "Comments Only" feels somehow... standoffish? defensive? How about
> > "Comments [Requested/Needed]" or something similar?
>
> I meant this as "This patch changes only comments", the hover text
> also explains that once selected.

Oh, I hadn't realized that was hoverable. I'm not sure that's very
discoverable at the moment.

--Jacob