You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 18, 2021. It is now read-only.
As brought up in #302 (comment), it would be great to be able to have the topics feature expanded in the following ways:
A user or org's topics should be immediately visible at a glance e.g. at the top of the repositories page.
A user or org's topics should be browsable in such a way that only repos from that user or org labelled with that topic are shown.
This simple expansion of this recently introduced feature would be a simple way to provide repository "grouping" functionality, a feature that's been requested a number of different times (#49, #136, #282, #302, #306), often with many echoes of support ("+1"s). Its use together with other requested features (like #144 or #939) could do wonders for "cluttered" sets of repos.
I realise "topics" are supposed to be a site-wide social thing. So you label your code php or whatever, and not staging or CS121. So perhaps some appropriate adjustment could be made to let topics work both ways, or something else entirely is needed?
GitHub support told me shortly after I posted this that they'd forward on my request to the development team. I haven't heard anything from anyone about it since then.
As brought up in #302 (comment), it would be great to be able to have the topics feature expanded in the following ways:
This simple expansion of this recently introduced feature would be a simple way to provide repository "grouping" functionality, a feature that's been requested a number of different times (#49, #136, #282, #302, #306), often with many echoes of support ("+1"s). Its use together with other requested features (like #144 or #939) could do wonders for "cluttered" sets of repos.
Request also sent to GitHub support on 2017-08-12.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: