This immediately struck me as not a good idea and I've been mulling it
over to try and figure out why. But I think Jan has nailed it here.
Anything that any private company needs changed in CouchDB needs to
move that through normal ASF procedures. Having conversations on
private bug trackers I thin
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>> On 18 Jun 2016, at 01:07, Ilya Khlopotov wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We at Cloudant using our own bug tracker. Quite often we have two tickets
>> opened for the same problem.
>> One ticket is in ASF JIRA and another one in our internal bug
> On 18 Jun 2016, at 01:07, Ilya Khlopotov wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> We at Cloudant using our own bug tracker. Quite often we have two tickets
> opened for the same problem.
> One ticket is in ASF JIRA and another one in our internal bug tracker.
> We have some automation, which compiles the iss
Hey Ilya,
I don’t think this is a problem at all. Naturally the commit messages are very
short anyway so extending it a bit is not a deal ;-)
All the best
Andy
--
Andy Wenk
RockIt!
Hamburg / Germany
GPG public key: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4F1D0C59BC90917D
> On 18 Jun
chdb.apache.org
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 7:07:22 PM
Subject: Extra reference in a commit message
Hello,
We at Cloudant using our own bug tracker. Quite often we have two tickets
opened for the same problem.
One ticket is in ASF JIRA and another one in our internal bug tracker.
We have so
Hello,
We at Cloudant using our own bug tracker. Quite often we have two tickets
opened for the same problem.
One ticket is in ASF JIRA and another one in our internal bug tracker.
We have some automation, which compiles the issues we worked on in a
current release cycle.
However, it is extremely
