Last modified: 2014-01-02 17:38:29 UTC
I'm not picky on the name if you can come up with a better one :) Per wikitech-l over the past week or two, we've been discussing a lot of stuff about the tool. A major problem with fixme has come up, in that we currently use it for two things: 1) This is broken, needs immediate fix or reversion 2) This could use some more work/followup/tests, but isn't actually *broken* as-is. The former category is what fixme was originally designed to mark, but kind of took on the second role since we don't have a status for it. Adding a status for that situation where it's not broken but needs a little more love would help us stop abusing fixme and better organize the state of code review (the action)
I propose "broken" and "needswork" (and retiring "fixme" since it's not instantly clear from the name what is intended).
improveme :)
+1 for "broken" and "improveme", with "broken" replacing the current "fixme".
r84852 adds "improveme"
Looking at the current statuses (<http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/status>), most use real words. The only one that doesn't is "fixme" currently. I think something like "incomplete" makes more sense than another nonsense word like "improveme".
Hmmm, that is true. And since fixme -> broken, we should probably be consistent with using real words here. Suggestions for real words meaning 'improveme' or 'needsmore'?
(In reply to comment #6) > Hmmm, that is true. And since fixme -> broken, we should probably be consistent > with using real words here. > > Suggestions for real words meaning 'improveme' or 'needsmore'? "incomplete" or "followup"?
followup seems misleading to me
"incomplete" would work; "followup" would tend to suggest that the revision *is* a followup, which it probably isn't.
Reverted in r85806 for the moment. So it's not a deployment blocker...
Being able to finish this and push it out would be nice, as we've got numerous cases where it'd be useful
If changing "fixme" to "broken" causes problems (I haven't looked at the code, so I don't know if it would or not), then I think reverting r85806 would mean we can close this. If we can change "fixme" to "broken" without causing any harm (oh, but some links would need to be saved!) then do that and change "improveme" to "incomplete" in r85806. Since we're starting on another big review spree, the sooner you can do it, the better.
I'd much rather leave fixme as-is, since it's already got entries in the database. I'm not entirely convinced that needsmore/incomplete should be a state. It makes a more sense as a tag.
I'm inclined to agree with Chad's previous comment, hence why I'm WONTFIXing this. If someone wants to do this on their local installation: 1) $wgCodeReviewStates[] = 'needsmore'; // add this to LocalSettings.php 2) Create [[MediaWiki:Code-status-needsmore]] with "needsmore" as the content, and the appropriate description about what the status means (the description is shown at Special:Code/<repository name>/status, i.e. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/status) as [[MediaWiki:Code-status-desc-needsmore]]
