On 9 February 2017 at 18:59, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+py...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> You can't readily do that with "#12345" or even "Issue #12345" because >> they're too generic. > > I don't see how we can say they're too generic for a GreaseMonkey > script to match, but not for rewriting history.
Rewriting the history has a lot more context: Senthil *knows* that his script is reading CPython commit messages. Without the more specific prefix, a GreasemonkeyScript would need to be configured to only run on relevant URLs, which is definitely possible, but would be pretty annoying to set up. > An option that I would be less against would be to, instead of > rewriting the actual message, tack '\n\n[bpo-12345]' onto the end of > the message. At least that way any misfires would be non-destructive. That's actually the way hg.python.org injects the links now: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b07d454e45a2 So +1 from me for appending the references to the old messages rather than modifying them in place. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
