From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@lang.hm Subject: Re: [RFC] git integrated bugtracking Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 10:35:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20070603114843.GA14336@artemis> <878xb19ot5.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <20070603133109.GD14336@artemis> <200706031548.30111.johan@herland.net> <20070603151921.GB30347@artemis> <20070603160736.GC30347@artemis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Johan Herland , git@vger.kernel.org, Michael Poole To: Pierre Habouzit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jun 03 19:35:01 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hutym-0001R9-KZ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:35:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752489AbXFCRew (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jun 2007 13:34:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753342AbXFCRew (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jun 2007 13:34:52 -0400 Received: from dsl081-033-126.lax1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.33.126]:56203 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752489AbXFCRew (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jun 2007 13:34:52 -0400 Received: from asgard (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id l53HYeuH019489; Sun, 3 Jun 2007 10:34:40 -0700 X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm In-Reply-To: <20070603160736.GC30347@artemis> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, 3 Jun 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 05:44:58PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> Pierre Habouzit writes: >> >>> Yeah, now that I read that thread, well yeah, I think notes are a hell >>> of a good concept for my ideas. I mean, a bug report would be basically >>> a collection of notes: >>> * the bug has been found at this commit ; >>> * the bug has been not-found at this commit ; >>> * this commit is a fix for that bug ; >> >> That's my feeling too. "Commiting" bug information in the tree is only >> half of a good idea. You want to be able to say, after the fact, "This >> commit had bug XYZ". OTOH, the idea (followed by bugs everywhere) that >> merging a branch would automatically close bugs fixed by this branch >> is a really cool thing. > > That would work with notes, as while merging you'll get the notes of > the commit in your branch, *and* the note about the fixing patch. So > there is no loss of "concept" here. In fact that was the thing that I > looked for. Notes are good. They just may not be enough to write an > in-git bugtracking tool, as a bug needs the "notes collection" concepts, > and maybe a few other. how would you identify bugs in such a way that they will match up when you merge different trees? if you can manage to do this it sounds like a great idea. but I'm not seeing a good way to do it at the moment. the answer may be a combination of a number of factors. 1. bug number doesn't work well in a distributed environment 2. something based on indentifying the cause of the bug (commit id + file + line????) will only work after you know the real cause of the bug 3. description is worthless, too many ways to describe things that have the same underlying cause David Lang