On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 09:47:20AM -0300, Leonardo Augusto Guimarães Garcia wrote: > On 07/08/2013 01:49 PM, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > >On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Marc-André Lureau > ><marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>Error reported in: > >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885200 > >Sorry, I meant https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904094 > >(updated commit) > Just out of curiosity, what is the purpose of pointing a link to a > bug that is not widely accessible? Even if I am logged in in Red Hat > Bugzilla I am not authorized to see the bug. > > Sorry to pick this specific case as an example, but I've seen this > quite a few time in the virt-tools list. In the end, others don't > know exactly what was the use case of the bug, as the commit message > is of no value in this case. Yes, that is bad. The commit message should be 100% self-contained in describing what is being fixed. Any bug link should merely be for tracking purposes, never relied upon for the description of the problem. And of course private bugs shouldn't be inclueded at all. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ virt-tools-list mailing list virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
