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
<issuenumber> is
- either the plain<number> + ":"
- or #<number>#
- or #i<number>#
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 today we have only one bugtracker.
Issues from other bugtracker systems should be ideally duplicated in our
system. The other systems can be public or private bug tracking systems
and issue numbers of the latter ones don't help anybody.
I would like to hear other opinions of people who actually work with our
code.
I overall agree with the proposal.
Regarding the controversal discussed form of the issue number my favored
notation is #<number># followed by #i<number>#. I am not in favor of the plain
notation.
References in the code to issue numbers from pre-OOo (StarDivision) issue
tracker should be removed. From my point of view in the Writer code (module sw)
they are mainly used by my former personallity known as od ([email protected]).
Thus, if you find in a comment something like "OD 200X-XX-XX #123456#", just
remove this part of the comment.
Best regards, Oliver.
