Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Changes: section. So Guys script should look for #(\d+) and > >> close $1 after proceeding (speaking in Perl). > > Andreas> lets use "\(close #(\d+)\)", some people might make a note > Andreas> related to a bug not yet fixed. > > Johnie> I prefer the current usage of #(\d+) -- a bug that is > Johnie> referenced but not to be closed can bet called just \d+, or > Johnie> Bug \d+, and the script will ignore it just as "release" > Johnie> currently does. > > But this is far less intuitive than the explicit close: and > one word should not be too onerous.
I agree, I want to be able to refer to the fixing of one part of a multi-part bug without having to dance around some over-clever DWIM automagical bug closure device. -- James
