On Dec 12, 2016, at 05:43, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
> This actually reminded me of another potential "problem". In the past
> we always used the
>(closes #1234567)
> syntax which we changed during migration to GIT to absolute links. Do
> we want to use absolute links for
>Closes: https:
On 12 December 2016 at 10:35, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2016-12-12 20:21 , Rainer Müller wrote:
>> On 2016-12-12 02:29, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
On Dec 6, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
(e) add "Closes: #XYZ" to the commit message
>>>
>>> When commits close PRs implicitly (by
On 2016-12-12 20:21 , Rainer Müller wrote:
On 2016-12-12 02:29, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
On Dec 6, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
(e) add "Closes: #XYZ" to the commit message
When commits close PRs implicitly (by merging the PR branch) instead of explicitly (by
using "closes #XYZ"
On 2016-12-12 02:29, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>> On Dec 6, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>>
>> (e) add "Closes: #XYZ" to the commit message
>
> When commits close PRs implicitly (by merging the PR branch) instead of
> explicitly (by using "closes #XYZ" in the message), the PR is remem
> On Dec 6, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>
> (e) add "Closes: #XYZ" to the commit message
When commits close PRs implicitly (by merging the PR branch) instead of
explicitly (by using "closes #XYZ" in the message), the PR is remembered
internally by GitHub and displayed on the websit
