In Gecko, I have taken the habit of requesting long messages when the
patch is not self-contained. Plus, I am currently working on bugs that
would have been much easier to puzzle out if we (well, if I) had
explained in the long message why some changes were made.
In other words, +1 for requesting
On 02/21/2016 02:02 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 2/20/16 5:10 PM, Josh Matthews wrote:
(as a random comment, I never read multiline comments for Gecko. Only the
first line + the bug number. It is the bug where the relevant information
needs to be available. Whether it it available also elsewhere
One thing that I've found pretty useful (at least when digging into the
history
of some Rust feature) is that the merge commits in both Rust and Servo
contain
the full contents of the pull request text (not comments, just the PR
message).
However, there still are "fixes #123" type PR messages since
This may also be less of a big deal here at Mozilla, where there's
(presumably?) only been one bug database since 1998 and will only be
one forever, but when I was at MS, I had to make accessibility fixes
in some code that was a bit more than 20 years old, and "fixes
B1#2003" is really tough to tra
On 2/20/16 5:10 PM, Josh Matthews wrote:
(as a random comment, I never read multiline comments for Gecko. Only the
first line + the bug number. It is the bug where the relevant information
needs to be available. Whether it it available also elsewhere is less
important, IMHO.)
Having the info in
5 matches
Mail list logo
