[core-workflow] Choosing a prefix/label for issue numbers

[Ned Deily]

On Feb 1, 2017, at 14:14, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2017 at 11:02 Ned Deily <nad at python.org> wrote:
>> On Feb 1, 2017, at 12:43, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>> > Historically commit messages for CPython have had the form of "Issue #NNNN: did something". The problem is that Github automatically links "#NNNN" to GitHub issues (which includes pull requests). To prevent incorrect linking we need to change how we reference issue numbers.
>> >
>> > The current candidates are:
>> >
>> >    issue NNNN (notice the lack of #)
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> That form, as well as issueNNNN (no space), is already recognized in comments on bugs.python.org and autogenerates a link to the bug.
>> 
>> https://docs.python.org/devguide/triaging.html#generating-special-links-in-a-comment
> We can change it to do whatever we want since we control bpo, so it can be updated to automatically link bpoNNNN or "bpo NNNN" as well.

Sure.  My point was that IssueNNNN is a form that is already in common use: I, for one, use it all the time.  Why invent another one?

--
  Ned Deily
  nad at python.org -- []