What is overyone's idea about the ever-growing list of pages in bugs/ etc.? Once linked to `done`, they're removed from the rendered [[bugs]] page -- but they're still present in the repository. Shouldn't there be some clean-up at some point for those that have been resolved? Or should all of them be kept online forever? --[[tschwinge]] > To answer a question with a question, what harm does having the done bugs > around cause? At some point in the future perhaps the number of done pages > will be large enough to be a time or space concern. Do you think we've > reached a point now? One advantage of having them around is that people > running older versions of the Ikiwiki software may find the page explaining > that the bug is fixed if they perform a search. -- [[Jon]] > I like to keep old bugs around. --[[Joey]] So, I guess it depends on whether you want to represent the development of the software (meaning: which bugs are open, which are fixed) *(a)* in a snapshot of the repository (a checkout; that is, what you see rendered on ), or *(b)* if that information is to be contained in the backing repository's revision history only. Both approaches are valid. For people used to using Git for accessing a project's history, *(b)* is what they're used to, but for those poor souls ;-) that only use a web browser to access this database, *(a)* is the more useful approach indeed. For me, using Git, it is a bit of a hindrance, as, when doing a full-text search for a keyword on a checkout, I'd frequently hit pages that reported a bug, but are tagged `done` by now. --[[tschwinge]]