I think that is a bit sad. Not tearing of cloths or gnashing of teeth sad.
Maybe stare whistfully into the sunset and think of what could have been
bad.
I'd prefer not to have them but I ultimately don't care that much. It does
provide a fun bikeshedding opportunity I guess.
Nik
On Nov 26, 2014 12:52 AM, "Chad" <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
No we can't not.
-Chad
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014, 9:11 PM MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
James Forrester wrote:
>We need to agree how we are going to name our repos, and much more
>importantly because it can't change, what their "callsign" is. These
will
>be at the heart of e-mails, IRC notifications
and git logs for a long
>time, so it's important to get this right rather than regret it after
the
>fact.
>
>A handful of repos are so important and high-profile that we can use an
>acronym without too much worry, like "MW" for MediaWiki or "VE"
for
>VisualEditor. For the rest, we need to make sure we've got a good enough
>name that won't cause inconveniences or confusion, and doesn't repeat
the
mistakes
we've identified over time. We've learnt since the SVN to git
migration a few years ago that calling your repository "/core" is a bad
plan, for instance.
Could we not?
JIRA does this prefixing with tickets and I don't really understand its
purpose. We already have Git hashes and positive integers. Is another
scheme really needed? And what was wrong with the repository names again?
I was pleased that Maniphest simply uses T as a prefix. I'm kind of
bummed
out that Diffusion is introducing shouting
obscure immutable
abbreviations.
MZMcBride
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l