On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 03:02:43 +0200 hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 08/10/2015 02:51 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > > > >> This is not a matter of going l33t, this is a matter of getting rid > >> of redundant and pretty much useless data all the same through > >> almost all commit messages. > > > > +1 > > > > "Gentoo-Bug: 123456" or even "Bug: 123456" is enough to uniquely > > identify a bug. Also it is easier to read (and to type) than its URL > > equivalent. > > > > So, would this replace the bug number reference in the summary? Should > we tell people to reference the bug only in the commit message description? > > Or do we say: > * bug number in summary optional > * bug number in description mandatory via "Gentoo-Bug: 1234" The latter I hope. -- Ryan Hill psn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
pgplEZSjsocFk.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
