At worst you could just use the issue number for the PR. But I think all non-trivial commits _should_ have an issue associated. For really tiny commits we could allow "no issue" or '#0' in the message. Just so long as the author is being explicit, I think that is OK.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Scott Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe I'm misunderstanding? This would require that all commits be > specifically associated with an issue. I don't have actual stats, but > briefly skimming recent commits and looking at the issue tracker, a lot of > commits can't be reasonably associated with an issue. This requirement > would either force people to create fake issues for each commit, or to > reference tangentially-related or overly-broad issues in commit messages, > neither of which is very useful. > > Referencing any conversation that leads to or influences a commit is a > good idea, but something this inflexible doesn't seem right. > > My 1.5ยข. > > > On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Nick Cameron wrote: > > How would people feel about a requirement for all commit messages to have >> an issue number in them? And could we make bors enforce that? >> >> The reason is that GitHub is very bad at being able to trace back a commit >> to the issue it fixes (sometimes it manages, but not always). Not being >> able to find the discussion around a commit is extremely annoying. >> >> Cheers, Nick >> >> > -- > Scott Lawrence
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
