On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Norbert Thiebaud <nthieb...@gmail.com> wrote: > sure but the dev need to use the canonical abbreviation because we > have bot that use them to detect association between commit and bugs > that is not the case on Ask for instance
technically speaking, the bot could recognize lo# as well as lobz#, but I am strongly of the opinion that we should have just one abbreviation! :-) > >> "Joel, go take a look at regressions on FDO" => "Joel, go take a look >> at regressions on LO" >> "Joel, go take a look at regressions on FDO" => "Joel, go take a look >> at regressions on LOBZ" > > How many place could one possibly be looking for 'regression' ... what > confusing meaning lo could have in this context... beside you could > use libreoffice bugzilla or 'salt mines' in that context it would not > matter much I think I'll start using 'salt mines' as a euphemism from now on... >... it is human to human interractions... the issue is that > dev have to put stuff in their commit message to talk to Bot > so one cannot be as creative there :-) true, the bots are kind of annoying in that regard :-) --R _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
