Mark Wooding wrote:
Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But your definately right; once the blame/annotate war settles out
GIT will have pretty much everything one might need - except a good
distributed bug/issue tracking type system. :-)
There ought to be such a thing. And I hope it gets called `bugger'.
I'm working (slowly) on integrating it with Mantis (www.mantisbt.org),
which we use at work. It shouldn't be difficult to reuse that code with
Bugzilla and other similar trackers.
The recognition thing is done in the update-script, looking for a hash
followed by a number (the bug-id) and then sending that commit to
another program, so it's simply a matter of including the bug-id,
prefixed with a hash, and the bug-topic somewhere in the commit message,
which is a fairly good practice anyways.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html