On Saturday, December 19, 2015 at 3:57:45 AM UTC-8, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2015, RjOllos wrote: 
>
> > The ticket guidelines for Trac suggest adding [patch] to the ticket 
> summary, in cases that the user has submitted a patch (1, 2). In some cases 
> the submitted patches are worthless, so there's no sense in having this 
> keyword in the 
> > ticket summary. In other cases the ticket author didn't include the 
> keyword so a ticket triager may be modifying the ticket summary. 
> > However, we generally don't want to repeatedly change the ticket 
> summary. One reason is that the emails won't form in a thread in most or 
> all email clients when the summary has changed. 
> > We also suggest using the "patch" keyword (3), which I think is 
> sufficient to label tickets that have patches. We can easily add/remove the 
> keyword depending on the usefulness of the patch, and ticket queries can be 
> easily executed 
> > to find all tickets with patches. 
> > 
> > Any other considerations that I'm overlooking? 
>
> Yes. A major one: Adding "[patch]" is a common method and not Trac 
> specific. If you try to change that for Trac then you only increase 
> confusion. 
>

Who is going to be confused and what are they going to be confused about? 
Anyone is welcome to use the prefix when submitting a ticket, it's just not 
useful information for the Trac developers. It's easier to do a query for 
tickets that have the "patch" keyword.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac 
Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to