I just scanned this thread, I had it muted because it annoyed me (it still does).
This entire slug discussion reminds me: What is the plan?
A lot of stuff discussed here can be easily be scripted away. It literally take less time to code up, than reading this thread does. However, I have no idea where the ship FEP is being steered right now. So I’m unsure what should be done.
Example:
Creating a new FEP has become more complicated enough now:
4. Copy the FEP template ([fep-0000-template.md](./fep-0000-template.md)) to the [feps/](feps/) folder and change the filename to fep-abcd.mdwhereabcd is the identifier computed in step 2.
became the monstrosity
Create a subdirectory of fep/(fep/) using the identifier you just computed. Copy the FEP template (fep-xxxx-template.md) to this subdirectory and change the filename appropriately. Use the identifer as the “slug” when filling out the frontmatter. For example, if your computed identifier was abcd, then your file would be located at fep/abcd/fep-abcd.md and your frontmatter would include slug: "abcd".
That should be like three points
Create a subdirectory of fep/(fep/) using the identifier you just computed.
Copy the FEP template (fep-xxxx-template.md) to this subdirectory and change the filename appropriately.
Use the identifer as the “slug” when filling out the frontmatter. For example, if your computed identifier was abcd, then your file would be located at fep/abcd/fep-abcd.md and your frontmatter would include slug: "abcd".
We probably need to provide a FEP create script now. Or is there some hidden goal in making creating FEPs harder? I’m confused of the goals here.
The goals are what we want to make together, and what happens depends on who can dedicate time and effort to make it. There’s nothing hidden. Yes, the coordination can be frustrating, and yes long threads get hard to follow.
Readers might be not familiar with Codeberg UI or the FEP process. It is not obvious that one should click on an item with esoteric name like fep-a4ed.md. It just feels like the site is broken.
There were different opinions about optimal structure. Are we going to use fep-****.md or README.md file name? If we decide to switch to README.md, that would be another breaking change. Hence the uncertainty.
(I’m not suggesting to use README.md; I was initially in favor of this option but changed my mind)
This only works if people don’t create massive amounts of work for other people.
Anyway, Codeberg CI is still troubled, so automating away the necessary FEP stuff (various checks, creating tickets, opening topics on SocialHub, etc…) will have to wait.
Thanks @helge, I agree. I didn’t have time yesterday to read up on things, and very busy coming days. I hope other FEP editors have time to spare. As said I think more candidates for FEP editor are welcome. Maybe @silverpill and @trwnh are willing?
One way to improve our process is to have actionable issues on the tracker, that point to background material here on the forum. That way we don’t have to comb overly long and various threads.
I now have a first working version: #117 - WIP: Automate things - fep - Codeberg.org. Basic formatting of new pull requests should be checked, and I have scripts that do some of the work for a new FEP: Create tracking issue, update README.md table.
Can I have feedback on the two todos:
Description of how to best merge a pull request still missing
Fully automating the steps after merging a pull request is too risky at the moment. So I would prefer something of a workflow like:
Merge Pull Request using Codeberg
Pull, Run scripts, Commit, Push
The alternative would be manual merging. Does somebody have a preference? Or a better idea?
Rename folder ISSUE_TEMPLATES to something better.
What would be a good place for automation related scripts? Something generic such as “scripts” would work, but I’m not 100% happy with it.
That is wonderful. If it is up to me, that is a go then. But I will wait a bit for other editors to catch up and voice their consent too… will create an issue on the repo, as I can’t mention the editors group on this forum (that is a config issue that may be tackled, @how ?)
I’ve removed the WIP status from the pull request after going through the half automated process again:
It should now work with a high enough vanilla python (probably 3.10 is needed for f-strings or something).
It’s currently a fair mix between human and automated stuff. My goal is not to do away with humans, but make the process “not tedious”. So feedback is needed if anything is “tedious”.
Done! @fep.hosts can now be mentioned by members, mods and admins.
I misinterpreted your comment at first so I added @silverpill to that group temporarily. @silverpill you should request membership to the group (click the name above) and someone from the group will add you.
There’s a permalink button. If people want a permanent link, they should use it.
So I personally vote to get rid of the entire feps folder, in particular feps/assets. One uses version control, so one can delete stuff without remorse.