[Koha-devel] Proposal to Standardize Bug Number References in Commit Messages

[Ian Walls]

I'm afraid I'm not seeing the need to standardize the expression of bug
number in commit messages.  We're already using "Bug XXXX" or "Enh XXXX"
most of the time, and that's worked just fine for me in all my lookups and
QA'ing.  Do we just need a pattern that's regex-able so we can program a
script to automatically process the patches?

As for each company reserving it's own prefix, I don't think that's
necessary (at least for ByWater).  Everything we submit already has a Koha
Bugzilla entry, since that's a requirement for getting submitting code in
the first place.  We link our local ticketing system to the Koha Bug
report, so we can update the appropriate tickets as the fix makes it's way
through the community process.  It would just introduce complication for us
to have local ByWater numbers in the first line of the commit; there could
be some advantage to having them at the end of the commit message, but that
would be purely for our internal use, and has particular place in a Koha
commit message.

I'm also with MJ:  Z looks too much like 2.


-Ian

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Paul Poulain <paul.poulain at biblibre.com>wrote:

> Le 10/11/2011 21:39, Chris Nighswonger a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > While we are proposing changes to workflow, etc. I would like to
> > propose that we standardize the manner in which we reference bug
> > numbers in our commit messages. Lately I have been working on scripts
> > to semi-automate the generation of release notes and having a standard
> > reference to bug numbers would greatly simplify munging through git
> > log and extracting them.
> >
> > So I propose that we use the form: [BZX...X]
> I love this idea !
> For many reasons:
> * I already use BZXXX ;-) (OK, it's a wrong reason)
> * Not every patch is a bug, so BZ is related to bugzilla, not bug
> * it takes only 2 chars, where "Bug XXXX" takes 4. In (many) places
> where only a part of the bug message is displayed, those 2 chars are
> usefull
> * Companies like BibLibre uses another tool to track customers bugs
> (Mantis). So all our internal  bugs are prefixed "MTXXXX" where MT is
> the mantis number. I know that Catalyst uses WRMS, ByWater bugzilla, and
> there are probably more.
>
> We (at BibLibre) make sometimes a mistake because one of us says "bug
> 5432". The other search in bugzilla, while the speaker was speaking of
> Mantis ! (maybe that's also because we are in the same array of number
> in Mantis as we're in bugzilla...)
>
> PROPOSAL: Why not having each company "reserve" a prefix, thus we would
> know that WRMS5432 => Catalyst internal bug number. BW5432 =>
> ByWaterSolutions BZ5432 => koha-community bugzilla number
>
> --
> Paul POULAIN
> http://www.biblibre.com
> Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc
> Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08
> _______________________________________________
> Koha-devel mailing list
> Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org
> http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
> website : http://www.koha-community.org/
> git : http://git.koha-community.org/
> bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
>



-- 
Ian Walls
Lead Development Specialist
ByWater Solutions
Phone # (888) 900-8944
http://bywatersolutions.com
ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com
Twitter: @sekjal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/koha-devel/attachments/20111114/6a733c8b/attachment.htm>