Re: labels on GitLab

[Valentin Villenave]

On 5/12/20, James <address@hidden> wrote:
> It was't blind Valentin, He did explain why he reverted it.
> Be fair.

*Cough* If the point is to facilitate merge requests, I certainly can
understand why Patch::* labels need to be at the top of the list; then
again, rearranging them is easy enough without “reverting”, as I said,
anything and everything. (Furthermore, I have to wonder about the
order in which they are now: in order of priority, "push",
"countdown", "review", ""new", "waiting", "needs_work" -- how does
that make any sense? The order I suggested was the one we had on
SourceForge, starting with "new" -- but that got reverted with the
rest.)

OTOH, since this is _also_ a bug tracker, then Type::* and Statuf::*
labels should also, IMO, be prioritized (albeit at a lower level than
patches) since this is what quite a few contributors are gonna need --
speaking as one of the former Lily bug meisters here; I used to spend
a _lot_ of time daily on the Google tracker.

I did offer a rationale as to what I’d been doing in my previous
message; if we’re talking about “fairness” and “discussing” stuff,
then reverting stuff and disregarding proposals is hardly the way to
go.

V.