From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1BB139357 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 06:57:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9590514331; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 06:57:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nexus.ut.mephi.ru (nexus.ut.mephi.ru [85.143.112.92]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FEF314309 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 06:57:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [85.143.112.127] (unknown [85.143.112.127]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dyokunev@ut.mephi.ru) by nexus.ut.mephi.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BDCA422E0770 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:57:05 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ut.mephi.ru; s=utmail; t=1439276225; bh=jy1p2GbZYnQr+jTzF1nVq1XaMme/J4t9Tmcls5ORDd8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MSHyaFTe34TFdasq2siCNI7KQEJFlIf5o827v+PVnoVEpxh1CrmAJSSBduLALqlu9 o6NUXQd7g9AMz2f/pjbyXL1W6GPHAbQz9YBpx76baqa7rj7QZz+BsYHva3HcV4/vMU IzcqeTYX42YceRJW0p6yuH3gccE+2iOiMxYDmSZs= Message-ID: <55C99CB7.3080908@ut.mephi.ru> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:56:55 +0300 From: Dmitry Yu Okunev Organization: NRNU MEPhI User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Referencing bug reports in git (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: sci-libs/opencascade/) References: <1439128706.40b3fd64ec9c5d6d94f0f0897740bc77622c24a1.xmw@gentoo> <55C75F19.90201@gentoo.org> <20150809215605.27ae6427@pomiot> <20150810004409.59637bea9aefd3f045b67614@gentoo.org> <20150810004044.76dda6e6@pomiot> <20150810021601.cdcae7226373ecd0d284086a@gentoo.org> <20150810151102.1a5f11fe@pomiot> <20150810234329.4007a427b15375814f9c7ea2@gentoo.org> <20150810230630.73f03cd8@pomiot> In-Reply-To: <20150810230630.73f03cd8@pomiot> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vMPROcTqHi98AdWGiBobIdf1NiFiHGbaE" X-LastMilter: passed X-LastMilter-Score: 5 X-Archives-Salt: 5a6b6434-1213-45ed-946b-2217aa5fa13d X-Archives-Hash: e50303e55af8f775f8748d9b5e4314a6 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --vMPROcTqHi98AdWGiBobIdf1NiFiHGbaE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello. I'm not a gentoo-dev, so sorry if I shouldn't express my thoughts with my lame English here. Please tell me if it's so. On 08/11/2015 12:06 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >>>>>> 3. Too many text, hard to read. Some bugs may refer to a dozen of >>>>>> URLs. >>>>> >>>>> And how is a dozen numbers better? >>>> >>>> Less text, more readable. >>> >>> How is: >>> >>> Bug: 123451, 453445, 344334, 343444 >>> >>> more readable than: >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/123451 >>> Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/453445 >>> Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/344334 >>> Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/343444 >>> >>> Readability is a matter of formatting, not contents. >> >> 1. One line and 35 chars are certainly more readable than four lines >> and 140 chars. >=20 > Character counts are completely irrelevant to readability. Visual space= > is. And in this case, exhibit A (also known as wall of digits) is more > likely to get people confused. I think it's just individual preference. No sense to argue this. Just everybody should consider that there exists another position on this question. However I want to add an other argument: 1a. It's easier to parse the "Bug:" header is there only bug IDs (without URLs). And is there any guarantee that URL format won't be changed in future (that everybody won't be have to rewrite their parsers). I mean not "near future", but "any long future". >> 2. Strings are read from left to right (at least in English), thus >> having most important information last on the line is not >> convenient. >=20 > This is not literature. Keys usually precede values, and namespaces > precede namespaced identifiers. A commit-comment is not a source code. It's an ordinary text (like "literature"). >> 3. A lot of duplicated and useless information consumes time and >> space, irritating people. >=20 > Well, maybe I'm very special then because I can *instantly* notice that= > the four quoted lines are almost identical and differ only by bug > numbers. Yes. But as for me this duplicated text adds a lot of garbage to the total text of a comment. It's harder to fast look over it. You were right =E2=80=94 "Visual space" does matter. And Andrew said "useless information" =E2=80=94 I agree. >> 4. Think about people using special accessibility devices like >> speech-to-text engine or Braille terminal. It will be pain for them >> to read all this notorious URLs. And we have at least one developer >> relying upon such devices. >=20 > And that's the first valid argument. Though I would doubt that > accessibility software handles random numbers better than URLs. Unless > you consider retyping one of the six numbers you just heard easier than= > triggering some kind of URL activation feature. I remember that William Hubbs asked me to remove one very simple ASCII-arted scheme (that explains how the code works) from a patch, because it's very inconvenient to listen that stuff using speech-to-text engines. May be somebody should just ask him for his opinion on this question? I think it's more convenient to listen pure bug IDs rather than a lot of full URLs. >>>> What is a corner case? Why not defining "clicking on the link in >>>> the git log" as a corner case? >>> >>> As far as I'm aware, URLs are supported much more widely than >>> Gentoo-specific bug numbers. They are uniform and unique by definitio= n. >>> The tools using bug numbers can be easily expanded to extract them fr= om >>> URLs. I don't really see forking cgit to support Gentoo bug numbers, = or >>> asking github to provide special rules for our commits. >> >> We should not adjust our ecosystem for closed and proprietary >> solutions like github. >=20 > URLs are not github invention. Localized bug numbers are local Gentoo > non-sense. So should we adjust it to ignore the rest of the world and > expect everyone to create custom hackery just to be able to see a bug > report? You can use header "Gentoo-Bug:" (instead of "Bug:") and explain in documentation ways to parse that. --=20 Best regards, Dmitry. --vMPROcTqHi98AdWGiBobIdf1NiFiHGbaE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVyZy/AAoJEK2K5AyOMGecgP4P/1XFAr56xheWwXEdXc8YU7fi sZXQdeUWLhDip2g6IvUPkuMmXjIsMWlBCeS9mw4FQmB69r6zRefLhEfjNdhlsWdV VDy+Cjn9Ihhtn0ULGKdKG03a0ZFOdu+No183MjyL08qfzs6PCS05BV2Lw3cRKeQR w5YyWspV8sK65Mlas9+ECHW9MomWJcJMhEhsLl6NueLl395449km2lkeUv8N+sQ6 ec6W8Uskhl2o9w3GpFiX6NnBcwdmHkMrnP7QLVgq9dO+LOEP4f/ostN0LWenBYoL F2etp0v3Fuh9SV3U+IH5hBc/hRsPeWihRyTSXwqzG4dFUh62hcDAcTnk2jSmeOXC rg3BD3sPoE4YgZCtWMbM4qZ0ZN3RD311NQgSIX2aALj5c3+32tmf/FuWEKf+kM8y VN54fh0WW31SBQACetRCgDcEs9NETUs5I5SnKdQqDk7aS6nHmJ0LXrutSOEIuBea VDm06gg2QYnHWa+Z7PzfkoRV8FvpfQBwvMPPGzQLKQHAmE2vwz62mfxYaXgZ3pdY N1RbHrii5kEFlTLjY/P3+NHi8owdTqx39RS7xkxdvGqD5DmCxtwgrWxQdKQWwMDE DJM0mqXDBBY7oaoT0gsTNJ/FHjOAgH73GgZQyLfMpJrwkUjW/rWmJC1f4YmcLI4e BCnRO3Jt631bF1R+Mv/Q =FpVK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vMPROcTqHi98AdWGiBobIdf1NiFiHGbaE--