On 2 May 2017 at 20:50, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > It’s generally only a two step process if there isn’t an existing issue > you’re fixing. If you’re fixing an issue you can/should just use the issue’s > number instead of the PRs number. We can make it possible to do like > <uuid>.feature and such too though if we think the random PR without an > issue case is big enough to warrant a special case.
Hmm, maybe. I tend to do all changes as PRs, not all of which come from an issue. But it's also true that it's not immediately obvious (to me) from the docs that it's OK to use the issue number rather than the PR number. I could try rewording the docs to that effect, but to do so will need the 2-step process as there's no issue for this :-) This originally came up for me because the discussion on https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/4461 had got quite messy - I felt that it might be easier for me to offer to rework the OP's PR rather than keep asking for corrections - but having to ass the NEWS entry made me doing that more complex than I'd initially thought. NEWS management was making a pretty trivial change in the wording of an error into a bit of a nightmare, both for me and for the OP. I was *really * tempted to say drop the NEWS and I'll mark the change trivial - but that seemed wrong, given that the OP had taken the time to write a NEWS item. I don't really have a good answer here. But this is my first experience with the new NEWS process - and it doesn't seem like an improvement over the old one, I'm afraid :-( Paul
