On 3/18/13, Andrej Golcov <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > > IMHO, where we can avoid unnecessary overhead is not using issue tracker > for small-to-medium obvious changes. IOW, if we see obvious problem or > improvement - just fix it and don't spend time for creating-closing > tickets.
+ > That also means that not all commit messages should contain > #ticket number. > The rationale for doing such things or not is beyond the discussion of dedicating more / less effort to ticket / commits . It is more about the fact that we are a community and changes committed now by person X should be put in the right context to be easily found and understood years later by person W . In the end something was done for a reason , and W should be able to navigate from commit to <whatever explaining the reason> (most of the time tickets) and vice versa as easily as possible . IOW , if we compare the effort spent in writing refs #123 in change logs vs the time spent by somebody to go through the changeset list and figure things out (especially if not familiar with the subject at all) ; IMHO it definitely pays the price . BH blame feature might help , but sometimes is not enough . -- Regards, Olemis.
