[core-workflow] Final chance to express opinion on history rewrite for issue #s

[Zachary Ware]

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> OK, executive decision: let's test a rewrite but only for things that match
> the regex at the beginning of the commit message (using Senthil's long list
> of possible formats so we get "bpo-NNNN" and not "Issue bpo-NNNN"). That
> won't have any false-positives and still gets us consistent issue naming for
> the whole repo (at least in the commit summary line, but that will also act
> as a scope to the commit that any ambiguous "#NNNN" numbers apply to bpo).
> If this test doesn't lead to people being happy we will abandon the idea of
> any history rewriting for tomorrow.

Note that matching only the beginning of the message will miss several
recent commits like:

https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7b8df4a5d81d
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/31342913fb1e
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/37705f89c72b

There is also the issue of multiple issue numbers in a message:

https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a5538734cc87
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/ffc0840762e4

-- 
Zach