A small procedural request
Tomoaki AOKI
junchoon at dec.sakura.ne.jp
Wed Feb 21 11:14:16 UTC 2018
Hi.
+1. But have one suggestion for format.
Something like
Broken by: rXXXXXXX
Broken by: Unknown (Bugfix but the revision introduced it is unknown)
and optionally
Broken by: No (To emphasize it's NOT a bugfix.)
would be better for scripts already handling "MFC after: " or
"X-MFC-With: " etc. to support this.
If put on the top with "MFC rXXXXXX: Comments", it can be
FIX rXXXXXX: Comments
or for multiple revisions,
FIX rXXXXXX rYYYYYY rZZZZZZ: Comments for multiple individuals
FIX rXXXXXX-rYYYYYY: Comments for massive continuous range
would be better.
Regards.
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 12:01:33 +0800
Julian Elischer <julian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> Hi,〓 I have a very small request to those committing into head.
>
> If you commit a fix, then if it is possible to easily do so, can you
> give the revision number in which the regression was introduced?
>
> like "this was〓 broken in r329xxx"
>
> this allows people who are looking for specific problems to say "Ok
> that bug was introduced after the snapshot I'm working on and can't be
> my issue".
>
> (we are not always working on the very tip).
>
>
> thanks
>
> Julian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
>
--
Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon at dec.sakura.ne.jp>
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list