incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <orwittm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Commit message summaries
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:24:45 GMT
Hi,

On 21.06.2012 14:10, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>> On 21.06.2012 10:17, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> That means we use something like
>
> ###
> <issuenumber>  +<1_line_summary/description>
>
> <longer description_on_demand>
>
> <patch_by_on_demand>
> ...
> ###
>
> where
>
> <issuenumber>  is
>
> - either the plain<number>  + ":"
> - or #<number>#
> - or #i<number>#
>
> I can live with all but we should agree on one notation. My preference
> is the first and then the second. I don't think we need the lower case
> 'i' anymore.
>
> Older commit messages can be interpreted by knowing the older
> conventions and today we have only one bugtracker.
>
> Issues from other bugtracker systems should be ideally duplicated in our
> system. The other systems can be public or private bug tracking systems
> and issue numbers of the latter ones don't help anybody.
>
> I would like to hear other opinions of people who actually work with our
> code.
>

I overall agree with the proposal.
Regarding the controversal discussed form of the issue number my favored 
notation is #<number># followed by #i<number>#. I am not in favor of the plain

notation.

References in the code to issue numbers from pre-OOo (StarDivision) issue 
tracker should be removed. From my point of view in the Writer code (module sw) 
they are mainly used by my former personallity known as od (od@openoffice.org).
Thus, if you find in a comment something like "OD 200X-XX-XX #123456#", just 
remove this part of the comment.


Best regards, Oliver.

Mime
View raw message