On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the > >> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do > >> themselves today. But there is in itself nothing that prevents them from > >> doing that, of course - other than a Small Amount Of Extra Work. > > > It'd be cool if there were a newbug@ or similar mail address that > > automatically also posted to -bugs or so. > > I believe that's spelled pgsql-b...@postgresql.org.
The point is that newbug would automatically assign a bug id, without going through the form. > > I think it's mentioned somewhere in the commit message most of the time > > - but not in an easy to locate way. If we'd agree on putting something like: > > Bug: #XXX > > Affected-Versions: 9.5- > > Fixed-Versions: 9.3- > > in commit messages that'd be a fair bit easier to get into the release > > notes.. > > As one of the people who do most of the gruntwork for release notes, > I can tell you that that sort of fixed-format annotation is useless > and usually annoying. I can see what branches you fixed the bug in > anyway, from git_changelog's output. I know that I very frequently wish that information were in the commit messages in a easily discernible way. > Actually useful information of that sort would be commentary along the > lines of "The bug exists back to 8.4, but I only fixed it in 9.2 and > up because <reason>." That should definitely be there as well, agreed. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
