Well, after a couple of days with the "cpython" prefix stripped, I have to say that I find it much less practical than it was before. Any other opinions? Regards Antoine. On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 01:11:24 +1000 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 00:52:08 +1000 > > Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I'm actually OK with the status quo, but if we were going to change > >> it, I would continue to leave (default) out. > >> > >> Completely unqualified = cpython default > >> Only branch name = cpython branch > >> Only repository name = other repository default > >> repository name and branch name = other repository branch > > > > Well, I'm not sure, but the regularity of the "cpython" prefixes makes > > it easier to distinguish cpython commits from non-cpython ones IMO. > > It's a mental pattern matching thing - word layout is noticed before > word content. > > So the suggested scheme: > > [python-checkins] Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] (3.1): Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] devguide: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] devguide (hg_migration): Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > > provides more distinctive subject lines than the current: > > [python-checkins] cpython: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] cpython (3.1): Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] devguide: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > [python-checkins] devguide (hg_migration): Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet > > What we have isn't bad, but I agree with Benjamin that it could be better. > > Cheers, > Nick > > -- > Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4