On Friday 02 October 2009, Eric Kow wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:03:55 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > Re-sending amended patch. However, I did not wrap 'darcs changes...' > > with a 'not', as explained in another message in this thread > > (<[email protected]>). > > Looks good to me. Applied thanks! > > added regression test for issue1632 > ----------------------------------- > Btw, I would have named that > Accept issue1632: 'darcs changes d/f' should not list any changes. > > I don't expect everybody to keep all these conventions in mind; they're > just little touches which help.
Does a comment "accept issueNNNN" trigger some status change in bug report NNNN? Are conventions like this documented somewhere? Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
