[PATCH] D155081: Specify the developer policy around links to external resources

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:359
+  If the patch fixes a bug in GitHub Issues, we encourage adding
+  "Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/12345" to automate closing
+  the issue in GitHub. If the patch has been reviewed, we encourage adding a
----------------
rZhBoYao wrote:
> probinson wrote:
> > mehdi_amini wrote:
> > > ldionne wrote:
> > > > smeenai wrote:
> > > > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > > > arsenm wrote:
> > > > > > > I haven't quite figured out what the exact syntaxes which are automatically recognized. It seems to recognize "Fixes #Nxyz"
> > > > > > Yup, it does support that form as well. I had heard more than once during code review that folks seem to prefer the full link because it's easier to click on that from the commit message than it is to navigate to the fix from the number alone. That seemed like a pretty good reason to recommend the full form, but I don't have strong opinions.
> > > > > +1 for encouraging the full link
> > > > Perhaps we could encourage using `https://llvm.org/PR12345` instead? Does anybody know whether `llvm.org/PRXXX` is something that we intend to keep around with the Github transition or not?
> > > @arsenm: It's documented https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword
> > > And for linking cross-repo: https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/working-with-advanced-formatting/autolinked-references-and-urls#issues-and-pull-requests
> > > Perhaps we could encourage using `https://llvm.org/PR12345` instead? Does anybody know whether `llvm.org/PRXXX` is something that we intend to keep around with the Github transition or not?
> > 
> > Currently the PRxxx links are to the old bugzillas, not the Github issues. It might be sad to lose that.
> If the full link is preferred, can you update the first bullet point in [[ https://llvm.org/docs/BugLifeCycle.html#resolving-closing-bugs | the Resolving/Closing bugs section of LLVM Bug Life Cycle ]]?
Given that the RFC was specifically about links and not about bug lifecycle, I'd rather change that policy in a different patch (I suspect someone would have to make a full RFC to make the change; I don't feel strongly enough to go through that process myself). It might make more sense to link to that section of the documentation from here instead of spelling out something that may sound like a conflicting policy. e.g.,
```
If the patch fixes a bug in GitHub Issues, we encourage adding a reference to the issue being closed, as described `here <https://llvm.org/docs/BugLifeCycle.html#resolving-closing-bugs>`_.
```


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D155081/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D155081