On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Robinson Tryon <bishop.robin...@gmail.com> wrote: > I felt like I was working hard to go through appropriate channels. > Perhaps if I'd spent more time I could've gotten more input from other > groups, but at this point I feel like I've already spent a ton of time > on just this one little piece.
Yeah, you did well. I'm sorry I apparently started a bikeshed on this... I have missed ESC of nov 21st (my fault), but 'the guys doing the work should choose' is not 'the guys doing the work should organize a beauty pageant election' On the dev side we are not used to 'vote'. decisions are usually just taken. When there is some controversy, the interested parties expose the merit of their respective positions, explaining the rational for their choice (and I mean _rational_ not _feelings_). That usually lead to either a compromise to address each other points, or the parties rallying around the rational of one side (we all have 'opinions' on anything when asked... but more often than not we do not _care_ that much about a given topic, so unless we have a strong argument to offer we usually do not demand that our opinions be counted as strongly as the one of the people intimately involved with the work and problems associated with it.. iow 'pick your battle wisely' :-) )), or more often a combination of both. in 3 years we where driven to a vote only once.. and even then that was more to have each position 'on the record'. So in that light I would point out again the criteria _I_ think are relevant for the name here: 1/ short. the summary commit message is the 1st line of a commit message, and is limited to 80 chars (72 preferred), and when a commit refer to a bug we want the bug reference in that message. 2/ obvious meaning and easy to remember and type, as much as possible. The opposition I've seen so far to lo# are centered around 'it can be confused with the abbreviation of the product'. I think that is a feature not a bug. in the context of bugzilla the use will always be lo#<number> the # make it clear that it is a bug number and remove any ambiguity... furtheremore these _are_ libreoffice bugs.. lo = libreoffice, # = bug here. So, other abbreviation may have merit, and may prevails, but discarding lo# for that reason seems a red herring to me. for reference a quick grep of the log message give use the following uses: fdo#nnnn deb#nnnn n#nnnnn #innnnnn# rhbz#nnnnnn CID#nnnnn cp#nnnn bnc#nnnn abi#nnnn i#nnnn #nnnnn# lp#nnnnn and a mix bag of some mistyped variations thereof (like #fdonnnn) Norbert _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
