Open
Description
Note: I'm opening this to gauge if there are actually instances out there that use different values for some of these settings.
β π reaction means you do, π means you don't
the problem
There's problems with all these page size config settings:
- they are overly specific, lacking a use case
- although having very specific names, they are still used for multiple things (IssuePagingNum for issues, projects, milestones)
- they bloat the docs
- they are partly undocumented
- they have the same default value (at least as of Increase default item listing size
ISSUE_PAGING_NUM
to 20Β #20547) - they have a bad naming convention π¬
the proposal
Let's remove:
ExplorePagingNum: 20, // ui.EXPLORE_PAGING_NUM
SitemapPagingNum: 20, // ui.SITEMAP_PAGING_NUM
IssuePagingNum: 20, // ui.ISSUE_PAGING_NUM
RepoSearchPagingNum: 20, // ...
MembersPagingNum: 20,
FeedPagingNum: 20,
PackagesPagingNum: 20,
and replace with
PageSize: 20,
This would leave us with the following UI page size settings:
PageSize: 20,
FeedMaxCommitNum: 5,
GraphMaxCommitNum: 100,
CodeCommentLines: 4,
ReactionMaxUserNum: 10,
I'd say the complexity of providing backwards compat is not worth it, as the resulting breakage will be very minor.
Maybe we could maintain ISSUE_PAGING_NUM
as deprecated fallback, that's the setting I've seen used most often (because it defaulted to 10 until #20547)
Screenshots
No response