Mark Wooding wrote: > Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> 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@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Fri Mar 24 22:30:13 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-03-24 22:30:28 EST