Right, that is exactly what I want to see, just on every commit. For example, https://github.com/mozilla/rust/commit/a02b10a0621adfe36eb3cc2e46f45fc7ccdb7ea2. has none of that info and I can't see any way to get it (without the kind of Git-fu suggested earlier). (Well, I can actually see that r=nikomatsakis from the comments at the bottom, but I can't see how that r+ came about, whether there was any discussion, whether there was an issue where this was discussed or not, etc.).
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Corey Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > > https://github.com/mozilla/rust/commit/25147b2644ed569f16f22dc02d10a0a9b7b97c7e > seems to provide all of the information you are asking for? It > includes the text of the PR description, the PR number, the name of > the branch, and who reviewed it. I agree with your premise but I'm not > sure I agree that the current situation isn't adequate. But I wouldn't > be opposed to such a change. > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Nick Cameron <[email protected]> wrote: > > Whether we need issues for PRs is a separate discussion. There has to be > > _something_ for every commit - either a PR or an issue, at the least > there > > needs to be an r+ somewhere. I would like to see who reviewed something > so I > > can ping someone with questions other than the author (if they are > offline). > > Any discussion is likely to be useful. > > > > So the question is how to find that, when necessary. GitHub sometimes > fails > > to point to the info. And when it does, you do not know if you are > missing > > more info. For the price of 6 characters in the commit message (or "no > > issue"), we know with certainty where to find that info and that we are > not > > missing other potentially useful info. This would not slow down > development > > in any way. > > > > Note that this is orthogonal to use of version control - you still need > to > > know Git in order to get the commit message - it is about how one can go > > easily from a commit message to meta-data about a commit. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Kevin Ballard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> This is not going to work in the slightest. > >> > >> Most PRs don't have an associated issue. The pull request is the issue. > >> And that's perfectly fine. There's no need to file an issue separate > from > >> the PR itself. Requiring a referenced issue for every single commit > would be > >> extremely cumbersome, serve no real purpose aside from aiding an > >> unwillingness to learn how source control works, and would probably slow > >> down the rate of development of Rust. > >> > >> -Kevin > >> > >> On Feb 17, 2014, at 3:50 PM, Nick Cameron <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> 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 > >> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rust-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
