New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[algorithms] Change stable tag 'mismatch' to alg.mismatch, so that it is consistent with similar labels in the same section #6653
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This needs an entry into xrefdelta.tex
.
Thanks! And just to be clear it would look something like this? % #6653 |
It's this example: |
By the way, see https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/wiki/Commit-message-format. |
Noted; I'm very much a rookie ;) |
Hopefully the title of the PR is now fixed... |
It should cover the commit message, not just the issue's title. |
The label in the title? |
In the commit message, according to the first example at https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/wiki/Commit-message-format#editorial-commits. |
How important is it to change the commit messages? I can of course do so, but I gather that github strongly recommends against force pushing and I'm not aware of any other way. |
PRs are generally a working space that are OK to force-push to. |
I'll do this then :) I'll prepend the first commit message with [algorithms]. But what about the second, i.e. the change to xrefdelta.tex? |
xrefdelta is just technical fall-out; you should ignore this for the commit message. |
It's all part of the bigger change, so you can rebase to fixup. |
Hopefully that's now done. Thank you so much for your help! (And of course I'm happy to make further changes if something isn't right.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While we generally frown upon changing stable labels, this seems to fix a rather disturbing inconsistency that outweighs other concerns. (Also, we expect few references to that section to exist.)
No description provided.