[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC round 3: DEP-3: Patch Tagging Guidelines

On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:03:28 -0400, Jonathan Yu wrote:

> I think gregor makes a good point, and that there can be a reasonable
> compromise between the two worlds of "hey, let's just use URLs in the
> Bug: field" and "no, I'm too lazy, we should just use a nubmer and
> refer to the Debian BTS"

Thanks for honouring my laziness :)
> > Maybe I'm too lazy but I'd rather use
> >    Bug: #123456
> >    Bug_CPAN: #12345
> Maybe an idea is to have a format like:
> Bug: #123456 (assumes Debian BTS)
> Bug: BTS#123456 (same as above, but explicit)
> Bug: RT#123456 (to point to the CPAN Request Tracker)
> Bug: http://blahblah

Ack, and/but the original proposal has Bug-<Vendor> which seems
reasonable to me, therefore I'd rather stick to Bug:, Bug-CPAN:,
Bug-Gnome, ...
> So you can use any of the above formats, either the short forms where
> you have: SYSTEM#NUMBER or the full URL.

Ack on either #number or URL.
> And given previous fields I think Bug-CPAN is more appropriate than
> Bug_CPAN (underscores are not used in Control fields from what I can
> tell, like with Vcs-Browser for example)

Sorry, that was a typo on my side.


 .''`.   http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG Key IDs: 0x00F3CFE4, 0x8649AA06
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/
   `-    NP: Queen: Heaven For Everyone

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: