On Jul 11, 2006, at 12:14 PM, Andi Vajda wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Grant Baillie wrote:
If you're going to write a script, I think it would be better to
have it pass stdin as the svn commit message, get the revision
number from the output, and then update the bug (à la Subzilla)
with both the comment and the new revision.
That's a great idea. It seems the easiest. I'll do that instead.
The issue, though, is that everyone is going to get the redundant
info they can already get from the bug report.
Given that most of the people in this thread are asking for redundant
information, I don't think that this is a problem. Also, in the
spirit of making it easy for readers, <http://producingoss.com/html-
chunk/communications.html#writing-content>, I think that redundant
information helps readers in this case. It's not like we are going
to be continuously updating bug titles and commit e-mails.
I know that I personally would like to have at least the bug title in
the commit mail. That extra click and switch to the browser really
disturbs the workflow, especially when you are reading multiple
commits lists. Having the title makes it much easier to try and
figure out if the commit requires additional scrutiny.
Ted_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
