Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com

[Don Armstrong]

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, Glenn Morris wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Haven't looked at any of those, sorry.
> 
> If that means "haven't had time", that's OK. If it means "haven't
> seen them", there's a problem, since you are registered as
> maintainer of that package (?).

I've seen most of them, but haven't thought about or reassigned them.

> > [Basically, we'll send everything to one list, and then fork out the
> > messages that only should go to bug-gnu-emacs to it, and vice versa
> > for the control messages.
> 
> Presumably this means debbugs can't (easily) be changed internally
> to DTRT.

Not without making an ugly hack, no.
 
> Couldn't you just use address@hidden to receive all
> debbugs output, then use procmail to send them on to bug-gnu-emacs
> or emacs-bug-tracker? (Probably depends on the details of the
> forwarding of bug-gnu-emacs to donarmstrong.com in the first place,
> of which I am ignorant.)

Sure; I'd just like to avoid having more hackish stuff on my servers
that I'll have to remember to migrate.
 
> > and 897.)
> >
> > This would require serious tracking of message-ids, which is kind
> > of a PITA.
> 
> So my simple suggestion does not work?
> 
>   If emacsbugs sees that bug-gnu-emacs or emacs-pretest-bug is already
>   Cc'd on a reply to bug, it should avoid sending out another copy to
>   the list. Ie, it treats it as a "quiet" submission only to be entered
>   in the tracker.

There's no way to know whether such a message is going to actually
through, and it's still pretty hackish anyway. People really need to
stay away from the "reply-to-all" crack.

> And #430 (which you said was doable) might help a bit.

Yeah, someone else asked for it in debbugs proper; I can add it, it
just didn't make much sense to me to change it since Reply-To: is
already set that way. The right thing is for mailman to stop setting
MFT; I don't know if that's a configurable setting or not.


Don Armstrong

-- 
There are two types of people in this world, good and bad. The good
sleep better, but the bad seem to enjoy the waking hours much more.  
 -- Woody Allen

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu