Refactor internal APIs for public vs. private issue identity #329
Labels
No labels
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
Chore
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
forge/forge#329
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Story
As a Forgejo developer,
I want that I can succinctly express public or private issue identity,
so that function calls and intermediary data structures are clear and concise.
Acceptance Criteria
Issuestructs.Background
In many places in the code, numerical IDs of issues are used to identify them. With private issues stored in a separate table, the ID values don’t identify issues uniquely anymore. Gusted commented in favor of this in the design ticket.
Implemented in my feature branch, in "Refactor use of issue IDs in internal APIs".