Differential e-mail subject re-arrangement

[David Faure]

Hi Ben.
Thanks for your fixes, much appreciated.

On jeudi 2 mars 2017 09:08:25 CET Ben Cooksley wrote:
> We'd need a strong use case to explain to upstream why repository
> should be in the Subject,

IMHO the use case *is* strong. If you watch many repositories
(as we do on this list), then getting emails with subject line
"Port to categorized logging", "Add missing documentation" or anything other 
subbject without context tells you nothing about whether you should care for 
the email or not (if it's in KIO I care because I maintain it, if it's in 
plasma-workspace I mostly don't, I know that someone else will take care of 
it).

They might argue we're stupid for sending requests for 70 repos into the same 
mailing-list, but even without that, even in someone's inbox, isn't it more 
important to first see the context (which repo it's about) before seeing the 
description of what was changed (given that understanding that requires having 
the context) ?

Qt gerrit emails start with "Change in qt/qtbase[5.8]: <description>",
that's much more readable because you can mentally parse "description" in the 
context of "qtbase".

Indeed T5244 was too generic, this is why I created 
https://secure.phabricator.com/T10874 for exactly this.
They didn't object to that one, they just ignored it :-)

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5