1 |
On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 03:02:43 +0200 |
2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 08/10/2015 02:51 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
5 |
> >>>>>> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> >> This is not a matter of going l33t, this is a matter of getting rid |
8 |
> >> of redundant and pretty much useless data all the same through |
9 |
> >> almost all commit messages. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > +1 |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > "Gentoo-Bug: 123456" or even "Bug: 123456" is enough to uniquely |
14 |
> > identify a bug. Also it is easier to read (and to type) than its URL |
15 |
> > equivalent. |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> |
18 |
> So, would this replace the bug number reference in the summary? Should |
19 |
> we tell people to reference the bug only in the commit message description? |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Or do we say: |
22 |
> * bug number in summary optional |
23 |
> * bug number in description mandatory via "Gentoo-Bug: 1234" |
24 |
|
25 |
The latter I hope. |
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Ryan Hill psn: dirtyepic_sk |
30 |
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org |
31 |
|
32 |
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 |