Re: [pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-13 Thread Ionel Cristian Mărieș
Can we also change a bit the changelog to have actual links to issues/prs? I often go through the changelog and what to see what the changes actually were. Thanks, -- Ionel Cristian Mărieș, http://blog.ionelmc.ro On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 4:29 PM, holger krekel wrote: > > I

Re: [pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-12 Thread Florian Schulze
I just list the usernames after the change and if the user contributed for the first time, the fullname as well. See this for example: https://github.com/fschulze/mr.developer/blob/master/CHANGES.rst Regards, Florian Schulze On 11 Dec 2015, at 16:14, holger krekel wrote: On Fri, Dec 11,

Re: [pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-11 Thread Florian Bruhin
* holger krekel [2015-12-11 14:29:35 +]: > I was wondering about the practise to have PR authors add themselves > to AUTHORS and CHANGELOG. The latter particularly is a bit odd, i.e. > to thank yourself for submitting a PR. I agree - I've even been asked on Twitter

Re: [pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-11 Thread Bruno Oliveira
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:30 PM holger krekel wrote: > > I was wondering about the practise to have PR authors add themselves > to AUTHORS and CHANGELOG. The latter particularly is a bit odd, i.e. > to thank yourself for submitting a PR. What do you all think about >

[pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-11 Thread holger krekel
I was wondering about the practise to have PR authors add themselves to AUTHORS and CHANGELOG. The latter particularly is a bit odd, i.e. to thank yourself for submitting a PR. What do you all think about having the merger do this last bit (changelog entry)? AUTHORS can also be usually

Re: [pytest-dev] thanking for PRs?

2015-12-11 Thread holger krekel
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 14:48 +, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:30 PM holger krekel wrote: > > > > > I was wondering about the practise to have PR authors add themselves > > to AUTHORS and CHANGELOG. The latter particularly is a bit odd, i.e. > > to