Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes: > On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 10:07:13AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> No additional me too messages are needed; I just wanted to wait to see >> if there was some compelling objections before changing the default. >> Since there haven't been any, I'll be implementing the fast version >> (n...@bdo and nnn-submit...@bdo always Cc: the submitter) and once I get >> a chance to delve into EoC (or whatever I end up using) fix it >> properly. > But I think making further changes to let submitters opt out via EoC is > *not* fixing it properly, and want to dissuade you from doing that :-) As a general principle I think it should always be possible for people to opt out of mail from any sort of automated or semi-automated system. I think supporting opt-out is a good idea. But I think that if the submitter opts out of receiving any mail about the bug, that should be clear to the package maintainer so that the package maintainer knows that follow-up questions will not receive a reply. Maybe the best opt-out mechanism would be to clear the submitter field? -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
