Surely either way you need to read the actual log message to distinguish
between correct and incorrect omission of the JIRA number. I would hate to
think you'd let something like "NO-JIRA: overhauled user facing API" go by
just because it was prefixed. ;-)

--Rafael

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com>wrote:

> If I see NO-JIRA then I usually infer that the author considered whether a
> Jira was required and decided not.  Without this marker, I can't
> distinguish between deliberate and accidental omission of the Jira number.
>
>
>
>
> On 14 March 2013 14:47, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > To be honest, I've never really understood the point of the NO-JIRA
> thing.
> > What's the technical difference between NO-JIRA: blah and simply omitting
> > the PROTON-xxx? I can't see that it would significantly improve
> grepability
> > since either way you need to run a regex over the whole log string for
> > anything that matches PROTON-[0-9]+.
> >
> > --Rafael
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I notice a fair smattering of recent Proton commits without Jira
> numbers
> > in
> > > them.  As far as I'm aware, all commits should either contain a Jira
> > number
> > > in the format "PROTON-xyz:" or, for exceptionally simple changes,
> > > "NO-JIRA:".
> > >
> > > Please shout if you disagree.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Phil
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to