Yet another possibility: my "close ticket" script could post the commits that end up being in that ticket as the last comment.
On Friday, January 10, 2014 12:54:36 PM UTC-10, R. Andrew Ohana wrote: > > Another option is that I could move all the links over to the commit field > (and also make the commits display their first 7 bytes, rather than all 40). > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:51 PM, David Roe <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> I think it would be good to have the link still in the branch field. >> >> What if the release manager scripts created a branch on trac (e.g. >> /closed/ticket/14304) that pointed to the merge commit? Then when a ticket >> is closed, the branch field could change to that branch, which would only >> be writable by the release manager. The link could be the diff of that >> merge commit against its first parent. >> David >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:05 PM, R. Andrew Ohana >> <[email protected]<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> Well branches are just temporary pointers -- we shouldn't assume they >>> even exist after a ticket is closed. The commit field should be locked >>> after a ticket has been closed, and that is something we could rely on for >>> the long term. I could make that a link? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Volker Braun >>> <[email protected]<javascript:> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds like a good idea! For the record, this is implemented in the git >>>> trac command as >>>> >>>> $ git trac log --oneline 15626 >>>> 598760f Trac #15626: Further improvements to splitting_field() >>>> 776795d Do polynomial consistency check only for minimal dm >>>> df52508 Further improvements to splitting_field() >>>> >>>> Maybe that'll make it easier for Andrew to implement it... >>>> >>>> Tickets get closed when they are merged, I don't think we necessarily >>>> need to color-code that. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday, January 9, 2014 12:39:16 PM UTC-10, David Roe wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Once a ticket is merged, clicking on the branch name doesn't produce >>>>> any output (just a mouseover, "already merged"). For looking at old >>>>> tickets, it would be useful to be able to see the changes introduced by >>>>> that branch. Perhaps we can show the diff from after the merge to before >>>>> the merge on the development line? Having the color be different to >>>>> indicate that it's already merged would also be nice. >>>>> David >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "sage-git" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andrew >>> >> >> > > > -- > Andrew > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-git" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
