https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45751
Krinkle <krinklem...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #7 from Krinkle <krinklem...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > and then to end up some of the people involved implementing a patch to give
> > the old format some of the advantages the new code has? That doesn't solve
> > anything.
>
> If the problem with the “old format”, as you call it, is that gerrit doesn't
> support searching it, the solution is to implement that in gerrit, not to
> change the format.
We didn't switch from "(bug #)" to "Bug: #" because that's the only way Gerrit
supports it. We switched it also for various other reasons:
1) More space in the change subject
2) Reduce irrelevant information from relevant context
In cases were there is only a change subject and not the full commit message
(gerrit search results, git log, email subject, irc notifications) the "bug .."
is not linked but plain text. Since a number on itself is generally not useful
that's only in the way.
In cases where you can click it (gerrit change page) the full message is
shown so it doesn't matter where it is.
3) Ability to distinguish between mentioning a bug (and getting it linkified)
and associating it with the change as metadata. Especially now that we have a
Gerrit-Bot for Bugzilla that leaves a comment when a change is associated with
it. So that when a change says something like "This isn't foo (bug 123), but
something else" it doesn't trigger the index.
It is meta data, it belongs in the footer. There is bias and personal
preferences and we'll have to get used to these minor changes in our workflow
but afaik there are no significant advantages to putting it in parentheses on
top. And all of the above to doing it in the footer as correctly identified
meta data.
Marking it as wontfix per reason #3. I noticed this earlier today where a
change mentioned various bug Ids in the commit message. If all those lead to
internal index associations with bugs it would've resulted in a mess.
Also note that "bug #" is already recognised as a link, just not as meta data.
And that's intentional.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
