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

[Nick Coghlan]

On 9 February 2017 at 06:55, Ezio Melotti <ezio.melotti at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2) we rewrite: users will see bpo-NNNN on old commit messages and they
> will know that they are not links to GH issues/PRs, and they might
> know/guess that bpo refers to bugs.python.org.  These will still be
> plain text and won't link to bpo (unless GH allows us to do it in the
> future).  We will still use bpo-NNNN moving forward, and this will be
> consistent with the rewritten history and unambiguous with PRs ids.

And if either GitHub or other hosting platforms running mirrors gain a
regex based linking capability, we'll have an easy time pointing both
pre-migration and post-migration commits to the right place.

Cheers,
Nick.

P.S. Note that all the old SF issues were imported into b.p.o with
their original issue numbers, so it's entirely correct to translate
"SF #433233" into bpo-433233

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia