Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: handling-regressions.rst: clarify that "Closes:" tags work too

[Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>]

On 28.03.24 20:29, Karel Balej wrote:
> The regressions handling manual claims that regzbot associates patches
> fixing an issue with the report based on the occurrence of the
> appropriate "Link:" trailers. It reasons that this does not add any
> burden on the maintainers/bug fix authors as this is already mandated by
> the "Submitting patches" guide. In fact however, the guide encourages
> using "Link:" tags for related discussions or issues which the patch
> fixes only partially, recommending "Closes:" for full resolutions.
> 
> Despite it not being mentioned anywhere in the "Handling regressions"
> guide, regzbot does in fact take the "Closes:" tags into account and
> seems to in fact treat them fully equivalently to "Link:" tags.
> 
> Clarify this in the regressions handling guide by always mentioning both
> of the tags.

Many thx for this and the other patch. I had planned to do something
like this myself, but never got around to.

There is just one thing that makes me slightly unhappy: this tells
readers that they can use both, but leaves the question "what's the
difference" respectively "in which situation should I use one or the
other" unanswered.

To answer that question: in a ideal world developers would use "Closes:"
when a change resolves an issue, and "Link" when it's somehow related to
a report, but not resolving the problem.

But we don't live in that world and I wonder if we ever reach that point
where regzbot could act accordingly. Nevertheless I'd say it would be
wise to write the docs towards that ideal world. E.g.: tell developers
to uses 'Closes:', but in some places briefly hint that "'Link:' works
for now, too".

I also find the patch description a bit verbose; and it would be good to
turn the text upside down: first outline what the patch, then maybe
describe the "why".

Ciao, Thorsten