On Feb 15, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 6:18 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Feature Discuss Emails Tag Update >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 02:14:21PM -0800, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:20 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Feature Discuss Emails Tag Update >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:14:12AM -0800, Min Chen wrote: >>>>> That may be possible, but we don't need to restrict to only one >>>>> component in the tag. It is just for quickly filtering emails. >>>> >>>> Sorry, but I think I disagree with this. I'd rather just have sensible >>>> subject >> lines. >>>> Too much tagging is going to be impossible to enforce, and frankly >>>> seems too complicated to figure out what to do as an email author. >>> [Animesh>] Chip you are not saying no to adding CLOUDSTACK-X tag as I >>> proposed? I agree too many tags are harder to follow so let's keep it >>> to minimum that allows for efficient filtering >> >> I'm fine with the bug ID being in subject lines. In fact, I usually do it >> when there >> is one. >> >> My point is that I don't want us to go overboard with tags. If we just act >> like >> responsible individuals and use clear subject lines, we'll be fine. > [Animesh>] Agreed too many tags and people will not use any. But IMO bug-id > helps filtering much easily. Agree with the issue ID tag. I was responding to the question of multiple component tags. -Chip
