On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 at 20:29 Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> > Just a reminder that I'l make a decision about this tomorrow so Senthil >> > has >> > a day to test a conversion with the proposal below. So if you like what >> > Senthil is proposing then please say so, else you can also say you don't >> > want any history rewriting. >> >> I'm +1 on history rewriting as part of the move. Having unambiguous >> clickable links is worth the risk of false positives. > > > I think everyone is forgetting that I did an experiment where the links > don't show up if there is no pre-existing issue or PR to connect with. That > means there shouldn't be any expectation of bad links from the initial push, > only if we continue to use the #NNNN format going forward.
Indeed, it's difficult to keep up with all the threads :) To summarize, are these alternatives correct? 1) we don't rewrite: users will see #NNNN, issue #NNNN, etc, but those will just be plain text and won't like anywhere. This might cause minor confusions to users (they can see they are not links to GH issues/PRs, but they might not know what they refer to). Even if eventually we might have enough PRs that the numbers will start overlapping, there shouldn't be any wrong link (the link are not created retroactively, unless GH changes in the future). We will still use bpo-NNNN moving forward to avoid ambiguity, even thought it will be inconsistent with the old ids. 2) we rewrite: users will see bpo-NNNN on old commit messages and they will know that they are not links to GH issues/PRs, and they might know/guess that bpo refers to bugs.python.org. These will still be plain text and won't link to bpo (unless GH allows us to do it in the future). We will still use bpo-NNNN moving forward, and this will be consistent with the rewritten history and unambiguous with PRs ids. _______________________________________________ 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
