2.17.1 status report - 1st draft

[timeless]

Gervase Markham wrote:
>> But a more standard checkin message format would be nice, too.
>>
>> Which... really consists of Bug XXXXX - description, <patch by ...> r=
>>
>> Note the capital B and the r=.

that capital B seems kinda annoying, i'm not sure how consistent i am 
about its case, i could ask bonsai.

my format doesn't have the - usually, the patchby/review line goes on 
its own line. I think i tend to use space as my delim instead of ;/, as 
gerv does. otherwise our formats are pretty similar.

>> I'm looking in your general direction, Myk. ;-)
> 
> 
> I use:
> 
> Bug XXXXX - <summary>. [optional descriptive extra text, including any 
> other bugs fixed by this checkin.] Patch by <nick>; <review details>
> 
> where <review details> can be something like:
> r,a=justdave.
> or
> r=bbaetz, caillon, a=justdave.
> or
> 2xr=myk.
> 
> So JP's script would cut it off at "Patch by". The description and 
> optional text is full-stop-terminated, and the patch author is separated 
> from the review details by a semicolon.
> 
> Obviously, a totally prescriptive format is wrong because there are some 
> patches that just won't fit it. But I think a default standard would be 
> sensible.
> 
> Gerv
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=timeless@myrealbox.com>