| 1 |
On 08/10/2015 02:51 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> This is not a matter of going l33t, this is a matter of getting rid |
| 5 |
>> of redundant and pretty much useless data all the same through |
| 6 |
>> almost all commit messages. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> +1 |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> "Gentoo-Bug: 123456" or even "Bug: 123456" is enough to uniquely |
| 11 |
> identify a bug. Also it is easier to read (and to type) than its URL |
| 12 |
> equivalent. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So, would this replace the bug number reference in the summary? Should |
| 16 |
we tell people to reference the bug only in the commit message description? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Or do we say: |
| 19 |
* bug number in summary optional |
| 20 |
* bug number in description mandatory via "Gentoo-Bug: 1234" |
Archives