Learn more about these different git repos.
Other Git URLs
The "Milestones" admin UI is pretty unhelpful. It just has name and date fields, and you can order the milestones...but it doesn't provide any indication of what the most logical order is. (So I just spent fifteen minutes ordering our milestones 'earliest to latest', only to save it, go to the UI, and find that 'latest to earliest' makes more sense for the UI).
It also provides no kind of pop-up helper for the date field AFAICS, and no text indication of what format the date should be in. So I've no idea if I should type 'YYYY-MM-DD' or 'YYYYMMDD' or something else, and if it matters at all.
Finally, I think having 'latest to earliest' be the best order for the milestones is kinda silly, because it means every time you add a new milestone, you have to move it to the top of the list (in the usual case where you're more likely to use a newly-created milestone than an older one). This is going to be a pain in the ass if you have 50 milestones. It's already a pain in the ass with 30, really.
There has been quite a lot of re-work done in the milestone part in the upcoming release which may cover some of the issues mentioned here.
Basically: - milestones should show in the UI in the same order as they are entered in the settings page. - the date field is entirely up to the user, there is absolutely 0 requirement on it (I've been using future as date as examples in a few of my tests). - the upcoming release will allow disabling old milestones thus making the drop-down list limited to only the active milestone by default.
future
Does that make sense? Do we want more?
I'd at least like some indication for the user that the date field is free text (and if it is...what's the point of it, exactly? Just as a reminder-to-self?)
I'm not clear on " - milestones should show in the UI in the same order as they are entered in the settings page" - my point is it should be reverse order, when you add a milestone, it should appear at the top of the list, not the bottom, at least for most use cases.
Disabling old milestones seems like a good enhancement.
Ok 4.0 has now been released with some improvements in the way milestones are handled.
Is it better?
@ryanlerch do you think the new UI improves on this ?
@adamw did you see my ping?
I did, then totally forgot about it.
...
I...wouldn't say it's that much better, no...
So, we had the fedora-qa milestones ordered 'newest to oldest' - top one 'Fedora 28', bottom 'Fedora 12' - then someone added 'Fedora 29', and that's shown up at the bottom of the list. So now it's 28, 27, 26...13, 12, 29. And there's no drag-and-drop so I can't get 29 to the top any other way than clicking the 'up' button next to it like 17 times.
There's still nothing to tell you what the Date field is for or what values are accepted - if it's free entry, then have a note or tool tip that says that.
There is no explanation of what the checkboxes at the right of the list are for - I'd guess they allow you to activate or deactivate the milestone, but there's nothing to tell you this at all. They're just mystery meat.
Yeah, the date field really needs to be re-thought a little here. Maybe having a user set-able start date and finish date (actual dates) might be a good start.
Also, with the new UI of the milestones, i'm not really sure that the order matters much anymore to be honest (this pull request has screenshots of the new milestones layout)
Having start and end dates would give us something else to sort on rather than arbitary weighting / ordering.
https://pagure.io/pagure/pull-request/3311
mentioned PR was merged in the meantime and no further activities or comments in 4 years, I assume it's fixed or not relevant anymore.
Metadata Update from @wombelix: - Issue close_status updated to: Fixed - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Login to comment on this ticket.