It looks like people in general prefer "bpo-NNNN" (sorry, Ned and MAL).
Maciej, can we update the requisite regexes so that bpo-NNNN is acceptable
in PR titles, PR comments, and commit messages?
On Wed, 1 Feb 2017 at 09:43 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote:
> Historically commit messages for CPython have had the form of "Issue
> #NNNN: did something". The problem is that Github automatically links
> "#NNNN" to GitHub issues (which includes pull requests). To prevent
> incorrect linking we need to change how we reference issue numbers.
>
> The current candidates are:
>
> issue NNNN (notice the lack of #)
>
> bug NNNN
>
> bpo NNNN ("bpo" stands for "bugs.python.org")
>
> Whatever choice we go with it will be how we reference issues in PR titles
> and comments to link the PR to the issue, and in commit messages to send a
> message to the issue about the commit.
>
> To start this off, I'm -1 on "issue" (because people will out of habit add
> the #), +0 on "bug" (it's different but not everything is a bug), and +1 on
> "bpo" (as it namespaces our issues).
>
_______________________________________________
core-workflow mailing list
core-workflow@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow
This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct:
https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
