On 21/06/2012 Herbert Duerr wrote:
There are more good reason for my suggestion to continue with the
i-decorated issue number:
The code base of AOO 3.4.0 already has more than 8000(!!!) code comments
using the #i123456# convention for referencing issues in bugzilla.
There are more than 20
Date: Wed Jun 20 06:58:35 2012
Was [Re: svn commit: r1351948 -
/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/sd/source/core/CustomAnimationEffect.cxx]
New Revision: 1351948
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1351948view=rev
Log:
for #119951#
Recently there have been three commits with great fixes but with
Hi,
On 21.06.2012 08:36, Herbert Duerr wrote:
Date: Wed Jun 20 06:58:35 2012
Was [Re: svn commit: r1351948 -
/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/sd/source/core/CustomAnimationEffect.cxx]
New Revision: 1351948
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1351948view=rev
Log:
for #119951#
Recently there
Sure, I agree with Herbert. We need some basic and rough comment for the
code change, then others could review it much easier.
2012/6/21 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com
Hi,
On 21.06.2012 08:36, Herbert Duerr wrote:
Date: Wed Jun 20 06:58:35 2012
Was [Re: svn commit:
On 6/21/12 9:39 AM, Wang Zhe wrote:
Sure, I agree with Herbert. We need some basic and rough comment for the
code change, then others could review it much easier.
2012/6/21 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com
We have already introduced the Patch by, Review By .. fields for
Herbert Duerr wrote:
I also suggest to mention the issue tracker when referring to an
issue number. In the history of the OOo project there were already
three different bug-trackers were used. E.g. issuetracker that has
been migrated to our bugzilla instance was referred to by the 'i'
before
Extending my older mail with some statistical details.
On 21.06.2012 11:47, I wrote:
I'm also against using a bare issue number, because having a number that
can be reliably parsed by eventual tools (e.g. a tool that updates
bugzilla with the revision number, a tool that links the revision
On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
On 21.06.2012 10:17, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have already introduced the Patch by, Review By .. fields for adding
further information.
How about logs like
issuenumber:issue subject line
I agree that the issue subject line is better than
- either the plainnumber + :
- or #number#
- or #inumber#
I can live with all but we should agree on one notation. My preference
is the first and then the second. I don't think we need the lower case
'i' anymore.
Older commit messages can be interpreted by knowing the older
conventions and
Hi,
On 21.06.2012 14:10, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
On 21.06.2012 10:17, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
[snip]
That means we use something like
###
issuenumber +1_line_summary/description
longer description_on_demand
patch_by_on_demand
...
###
where
Hi,
On 21.06.2012 14:10, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
[..]
good point and I agree.
That means we use something like
###
issuenumber + 1_line_summary/description
longer description_on_demand
patch_by_on_demand
...
###
where
issuenumber is
-
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
jogischm...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
On 21.06.2012 10:17, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have already introduced the Patch by, Review By .. fields for adding
further information.
How about logs like
On 21 June 2012 19:10, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
jogischm...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 6/21/12 11:47 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
On 21.06.2012 10:17, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We have already introduced the Patch by, Review By .. fields for
Hi;
--- Gio 21/6/12, Armin Le Grand armin.le.gr...@me.com ha scritto:
...
For me in the order of preference I would use:
- #number# (we have only one tracker, no need for
flags like 'i')
- #inumber#
I would not like plain number + :, it is just too
hard to recognize (also to grep for).
14 matches
Mail list logo
