| 1 |
W dniu sob, 30.09.2017 o godzinie 19∶36 +0200, użytkownik Kristian |
| 2 |
Fiskerstrand napisał: |
| 3 |
> On 09/30/2017 07:32 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > > > Which could also be seen as an argument for Gentoo-Bug: XXXXXX |
| 5 |
> > > > > |
| 6 |
> > > > |
| 7 |
> > > > And then Gentoo-Closes, Debian-Closes, Fancybuntu-Closes, My-Fun- |
| 8 |
> > > > Upstream-Tracker-Bug... |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > > Not really, Closes is already used for multiple providers of |
| 11 |
> > > infrastructure such as Bitbucket and GitHub, so here URI is anyways |
| 12 |
> > > needed and isn't specific to Gentoo. Debian bug wouldn't be closed by us |
| 13 |
> > > to begin with, but it'd fit into a generic Reference: tag if we pulled a |
| 14 |
> > > patch from it or it discusses it somehow. Ditto for upstream, that goes |
| 15 |
> > > in Reference as well |
| 16 |
> > > |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > How is this an argument for introducing a completely incompatible |
| 19 |
> > and inconsistent concept for the other of the pair? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Please elaborate |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
You get two tags: Bug to reference without closing, and Closes to |
| 25 |
reference+close. Both should have the same usage for consistency. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Best regards, |
| 29 |
Michał Górny |
Archives