On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jason Grout
<jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
> On 2/7/12 2:16 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM, William Stein<wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Simon King<simon.k...@uni-jena.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi William,
>>>>
>>>> On 7 Feb., 20:47, William Stein<wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It's important (in fact, critical) that the trac ticket number is
>>>>> clearly available in the commit message. But having it twice in two
>>>>> different ways in almost every message seems a little bit sloppy to
>>>>> me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We were told, by different release managers, that the commit message
>>>> has to identify the ticket number. Patches not following the rule were
>>>> rejected.
>>>>
>>>> If that rule has changed in the meantime, the new rule ("Do not
>>>> mention the ticket number in your commit message!") should be enforced
>>>> in the same way as the old rule was enforced.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the commit message should mention the ticket number. This
>>> makes it much easier to keep track of stuff, even before the release
>>> manager puts the code in Sage. E.g., I have a big patch queue of my
>>> own code, and I find the ticket numbers in commit messages useful.
>>>
>>> What I'm suggesting is that the script that auto-adds ticket numbers
>>> should strip the user-added ticket number first, to avoid extensive
>>> duplication.
>>
>>
>> Or at the very least not add it if it's not already there. (Stripping
>> it in all its variants might be hard.)
>
>
> On the other hand, I think the canonical number should be the automatically
> prepended number, and that the prepended number should *always* be added:
Are you arguing that this from "hg log" is a good commit message?
summary: Trac #6804: Trac #6804: change '=' to '>=' in the
docstring for Permutation.weak_excedences()
> 1. Its format is consistent, so we can write scripts and things that take
> advantage of that consistency
>
> 2. It's guaranteed to be correct, i.e., to reflect what ticket the patch was
> actually pulled from (in case patches move from ticket to ticket or the user
> makes a mistake).
>
> When I do hg log with my patches, I get output like this:
>
> changeset: 16483:722b00d2890c
> tag: trac-12229-manifest.patch
> user: Jason Grout <jason.gr...@drake.edu>
> date: Mon Jan 16 15:13:16 2012 -0600
> summary: Patch MANIFEST.in to copy the .inc and .png sagenb doc files
>
>
> Notice that the "tag" field gives the filename. That's a great place to put
> the ticket number (in the filename). You then see the ticket number when
> you do hg queues commands, you see it in hg log, you see it in the patches
> directory, you see it on trac and when uploading, etc. The summary does not
> contain the ticket number---that is added when the ticket is merged.
If I then qfinish the patch, that tag vanishes, right? At least if I
simply import the patch then it vanishes.
-- William
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
>
> --
> To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
> sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
> URL: http://www.sagemath.org
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
