bloodhound-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Olemis Lang <>
Subject Re: Commit Ticket Updater With Bloodhound 0.7
Date Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:38:54 GMT
On 10/16/13, Joachim Dreimann <> wrote:
> On 16 October 2013 10:38, Ben Smithers <> wrote:
> Why is it important that the non-prefixed syntax is supported? If it never
> existed in the first place, would you miss it?

In the commit hooks I think #prefix-123 syntax has to be supported .
Nevertheless after upgrading from e.g. a legacy Trac environment if
the repository is linked to multiple products then in the repository
browser the ticket link will vary depending on context . That's wrong
and annoying .

>>  Why not have the format as #Prod-1 (or perhaps, #Prod:1) but allow the
>> product prefix to be dropped where there is only one project linked to
>> the
>> repository.

To prevent the issue mentioned above should users link the repository
to a different product .

>> Perhaps this could be an option in the configuration.


>> The hook is implemented at post-commit/post-receive so it's not possible
>> to reject it anyway (You could add an additional hook before hand, but
>> this
>> seems unnecessarily complex to me). I agree with Joe that simply warning
>> the user the ticket id was not resolved is appropriate. I imagine that
>> forgetting the product prefix entirely will be the more common error
>> though.
> From my experience with other ticketing systems this is only a common error
> during a brief transition period to prefixed IDs, or permanently if the
> system mixes prefixed and non-prefixed IDs.

There is still the open issue involving browser UI .

> I suggest we should always
> prefix ticket IDs.




Olemis - @olemislc

View raw message