fediverse/fep
37
268
Fork
You've already forked fep
100

WIP: Sequential FEP IDs #801

Draft
silverpill wants to merge 3 commits from silverpill/fep:meta-seq into main
pull from: silverpill/fep:meta-seq
merge into: fediverse:main
fediverse:main
fediverse:pages

This is a demonstration of how a switch from hash-based to sequential IDs could be done.
Old proposals are not changed. Sequential IDs are only enforced for new ones.

Resolves #196

This is a demonstration of how a switch from hash-based to sequential IDs could be done. Old proposals are not changed. Sequential IDs are only enforced for new ones. Resolves https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/issues/196
Sequential FEP IDs
Some checks failed
ci/woodpecker/pr/test Pipeline failed
5d4ed42913
CI: Properly remove proposal
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/test Pipeline was successful
637b88562d
@ -20,1 +20,3 @@
slug = title_to_slug(title)
max_fep_id = len([fep for fep in index() if fep.parsed_frontmatter["dateReceived"] > '2026年05月01日'])
slug = str(max_fep_id + 1).zfill(4)
Owner
Copy link

Two things

  • I would prefer using 5 digits. It's then obvious that FEP-00001 is the first FEP with the new numeration
  • '2026年05月01日' should be a config variable, e.g. START_FEP_SEQUENCING = '2026年05月01日'.
Two things - I would prefer using 5 digits. It's then obvious that FEP-00001 is the first FEP with the new numeration - '2026年05月01日' should be a config variable, e.g. START_FEP_SEQUENCING = '2026年05月01日'.
Author
Owner
Copy link

I would prefer using 5 digits. It's then obvious that FEP-00001 is the first FEP with the new numeration

What is the benefit of making this obvious?

I intentionally preserved the current ID format to reduce disruption.

>I would prefer using 5 digits. It's then obvious that FEP-00001 is the first FEP with the new numeration What is the benefit of making this obvious? I intentionally preserved the current ID format to reduce disruption.
Author
Owner
Copy link

Discussion: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/fep-process-suggestion-dont-use-title-based-hash-for-slug/8531/15

Discussion: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/fep-process-suggestion-dont-use-title-based-hash-for-slug/8531/15
Merge branch 'main' into meta-seq
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/test Pipeline was successful
74d6151541
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/test Pipeline was successful
This pull request is marked as a work in progress.
This branch is out-of-date with the base branch
View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u meta-seq:silverpill-meta-seq
git switch silverpill-meta-seq

Merge

Merge the changes and update on Forgejo.

Warning: The "Autodetect manual merge" setting is not enabled for this repository, you will have to mark this pull request as manually merged afterwards.

git switch main
git merge --no-ff silverpill-meta-seq
git switch silverpill-meta-seq
git rebase main
git switch main
git merge --ff-only silverpill-meta-seq
git switch silverpill-meta-seq
git rebase main
git switch main
git merge --no-ff silverpill-meta-seq
git switch main
git merge --squash silverpill-meta-seq
git switch main
git merge --ff-only silverpill-meta-seq
git switch main
git merge silverpill-meta-seq
git push origin main
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
fediverse/fep!801
Reference in a new issue
fediverse/fep
No description provided.
Delete branch "silverpill/fep:meta-seq"

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?