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

[Brett Cannon]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 at 16:06 Ned Deily <nad at python.org> wrote:

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 18:24, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > It looks like people in general prefer "bpo-NNNN" (sorry, Ned and MAL).
>
> I'll live. :)
>
> > Maciej, can we update the requisite regexes so that bpo-NNNN is
> acceptable in PR titles, PR comments, and commit messages?
>
> Two things:
>
> 1. What about Maciej's earlier comment:
>
> On Feb 2, 2017, at 16:20, Maciej Szulik <soltysh at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hmm... for all the #NNN in commits we'll get quite a few false links in
> github, so maybe removing the # would
> > be valuable, or replacing it with issue/bpo.
>
> I'm guessing that's gonna be a ugly usability issue if all the old github
> commit pages offer invalid links for all of the old #nnnnn references.  Or
> am I missing something there?
>

See Senthil's comment. It seems doable if we want to do it and can agree on
the regex to use to transform them.


>
> 2. What about Misc/NEWS entries?  Are we going to continue to ask
> committers to use the old format (Issue #nnnnn) there?  Note these are
> currently auto-linked in the docs builds, e.g.
> https://docs.python.org/3.6/whatsnew/changelog.html.
>

Don't know. My expectation is that long term we won't even specify them in
the entry itself and it will be part of the filename when we move to a
file-per-entry solution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/attachments/20170204/62a32fd2/attachment.html>