On Dec 4, 2014, at 9:25 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes:

...

It seems to me the simplest way is simply to include the PR number into the new local branch name that person made. I don't see why we need any of the complicated goobly guck below if we just follow my proposal above. Nor do I see any harm in my proposal. If you want to provide also a description of the pull request functionality we could have

myuserid/pullrequest-number-mychosendescription

Fine, do you have a preference between these?

pr123/username/description username/pr123-description

Don't care. Didn't realize branches could have two slashes

Spelling out "pullrequest" uses a lot of line space

...

"Annotating the PR # into the merge commit" as an additional convention is fine with me also but is orthogonal to the finding above."

Sure, but valuable because the reference shows up as a PR comment so it's easier to tell when a given PR is in 'next'.