Associating bugs with changesets

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

On Tuesday, 2. June 2009 02:03:15 Greg Ward wrote:
> That'll never scale.  It is essential that the process be automated.
> (Obviously, it requires human involvement to specify which bug(s) are
> fixed in a particular commit or push, and further human intervention
> to fix errors in that process.  But finding which bugs are fixed in
> build X must be automatic.)

Why don't you use a simple flat file in the repository which contains the 
corrections? 

Something like 

------ .bugID_corrections ------
094be09b1c5dcd917436beebd0be3e24ea0d31db      52313      52131
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 

The format here would just be

node_hex      wrong_bugID      correct_bugID

(the 6 spaces are only for readabilities sake :) )

This way the automatic tool could just look at the log, then apply the changes 
in the correction file. 

You could also go a step further and allow rewriting of the whole commit 
message for QA via this file. 

To make the whole process faster, the commit message for the change in the 
correction file could contain the information about the changes. That way you 
could use the correction file for full message rewriting and the commit 
message *of that correction* for the concise information for QA (node A 
doesn't fix bug B but bug C). 

Best wishes, 
Arne

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 
   - singing a part of the history of free software -
              http://infinite-hands.draketo.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20090602/40cf018f/attachment.pgp