On 03/23/2015 10:31 AM, Sandro Santilli wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:24:19AM +0100, Matthias Kuhn wrote: >> Hi >> >> On 03/23/2015 10:01 AM, Sandro Santilli wrote: >>> I suggest creating a new 2.8.3 target in hub then, and start moving issues >>> there (those that are not regressions introduced by 2.8.1, if any). >>> >>> Then, by *requiring* that any commit in 2.8 *must* reference a ticket >>> in hub, release management can happen from there (hub), allowing for >>> a per-ticket discussion (if needed). >> What's the benefit compared to inspecting the git log with optional >> references to tickets where available? >> Discussions may as well be attached to a commit or pull request. > Discussion in commit/PR are both under full control by github, > HUB is in the hands of QGIS developers. Ticketting system allows > to attach a milestone to the issue, postponing if agreed. It also > allows to query for "all issues fixed in version X" which is easier > to answer than associating a (usually higher) number of commits to > the corresponding issue. It may just be me, but I don't think any of this brings a huge benefit. The rule also brings some overhead. When I find a bug that's not in the tracker I prefer to just fix it and describe what has been done in the commit message. Creating an issue for that is a bit cumbersome.
Matthias
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
