[dev] [commits] Horde branch master updated. 9af8f495eb0013aa1ae6557446bc58bbd1c7982f

[Michael M Slusarz]

Quoting Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:

> Zitat von Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>
>> I don't have an opinion on the former.  The latter is not  
>> acceptable; this is a perfectly valid changelog entry, for example:
>>
>> [xyz] This is a changelog entry (Bug #XXXXX; foo at example.com).
>
> The format is actually:
> [xyz] This is a changelog entry (foo at example.com, Bug #XXXXX).

No - that's not correct (and if I've done that in the past, I have  
been mistaken).  We want to list entries to a user in their order of  
usefulness, from left to right.  When describing a change, the change  
description is the most important.  With respect to the contributor, a  
Bug/Request # is next most important if details of the change want to  
be further investigated.  Listing the contributor first just adds  
noise between the important facts.

Sure enough, this would also be a reasonable changelog format:

Bug #####: Changelog description (<contributor>) [mms].

This wouldn't:

[mms] <Contributor> - Changelog description (Bug #####).

michael

___________________________________
Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]