Historical issues

[paulk-asert]

I didn't notice before but geb issues were stored in the geb/issues repo not the geb/geb repo. The latter of these has been "moved" under Apache. Asciidoc is currently set up with a macro to point issue links to the geb/issues repo. I was thinking of just leaving the historical issues where they are for now and just have two macros for old and new issue links. We can always copy/move the geb/issues repo as well later if we want (and change the respective macro). Thoughts?

[paulk-asert]

I'll go ahead and merge that proposed PR. If folks aren't happy, we can rollback later.

[jonnybot0]

I do think we need to go through the old issues and migrate them to the new repository. I have read that Geb setup that separate repo as some means of keeping issue numbers that matched the old CodeHaus Jira system. I suppose that was to prevent needing to update old issues.

Bulk transfer is pretty straightforward using the GitHub CLI.

There are about 280 instances of the issueh macro. Seems like it should be a straightforward, if a little bit tedious script to write to go through the historical issues, transfer them to the new repository, and then update the issueh reference to simply use the new issue macro and the new number.

I used a code generator to bash out something that should do this:

#!/bin/bash

# Variables
SOURCE_REPO="source_owner/source_repo"
DEST_REPO="dest_owner/dest_repo"
CODE_DIR="/path/to/your/codebase"

# List all issues in the source repository
issue_numbers=$(gh issue list -R "$SOURCE_REPO" -s all -L 500 --json number -q '.[].number')

# Iterate over each issue number
for old_issue_number in $issue_numbers; do
    # Transfer the issue and capture the new issue URL
    new_issue_url=$(gh issue transfer "$old_issue_number" "https://github.com/$DEST_REPO" -R "$SOURCE_REPO" --json url -q '.url')

    # Extract the new issue number from the URL
    new_issue_number=$(echo "$new_issue_url" | grep -oP '(?<=/issues/)\d+')

    # Update references in the codebase
    if [ -n "$new_issue_number" ]; then
        echo "Updating references from issueh:$old_issue_number to issue:$new_issue_number"
        find "$CODE_DIR" -type f -exec sed -i '' "s/issueh:$old_issue_number/issue:$new_issue_number/g" {} +
    else
        echo "Failed to transfer issue #$old_issue_number"
    fi
done

Looks to me like it should work with a little testing. If there are no objections, I'll go ahead & do that a week from today (after spot-testing an issue or two).

[paulk-asert]

The main thing is that if you change the numbers, the issue mentions in existing commits will be lost/more confusing. There aren't many but for example this commit:

54acf785209

The commit message is:

Add a failing test for geb/issues#395 by adding more test coverage for
delegation of waitFor().

Also, older commits use codehaus Jira references, e.g.

be700038b3f

Has commit message:

GEB-287:Support for static atCheckWait on Page classes

Doesn't have an automatic link but at least you can get to:

geb/issues#287

And it looks like there are lots of commits that use that convention.