That place used JIRA where the typical ticket ID was around 10 characters. That wasted a lot of prime real estate, e.g. in my email inbox, in history views (tig, gitk, and so on).
I also don't see the claimed benefit for git blame. In a real code base with significant history, it happens often enough that the first blame is an unrelated refactoring and you need to dig deeper. Therefore, I find that best practice is to look at the blamed commit first instead of the ticket. That gives you the full commit message, which can still contain a reference to an issue.
Putting footer lines like "Fixes: <issue>" into commit messages works much better. It's just as easily visible in git log etc. and doesn't waste space.
>That place used JIRA where the typical ticket ID was around 10 characters. That wasted a lot of prime real estate
Interesting, just for the sake of it, I measured how much screen space the issue ID takes up on my monitor with my current font settings - around 5% (of monitor width, of course). Never been a problem for me.
As for screen space, one of the standard email client layouts has a vertical split, with message titles on the left and bodies on the right. This generally fits well with 16:9 screens, but the line width for titles is limited. Having e.g. the affected component or subsystem up front is much more useful when skimming.
Well, our current issue tracker was migrated from Jira and I can still see all the ancient Jira tickets just fine (I mean what's important: the comments).
In any case, something is better than nothing at all.