On Sun, Jun 01, 2025 at 12:15:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Julien Plissonneau Duquène (2025-06-01 12:05:43) > > Hi Jonas, > > > > Le 2025-05-31 21:41, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > > > > > > The problem is that the confident submitter is a bot. > > > > > > In the concrete case, I replied to point out that the bug closure was a > > > mistake. That reply bounced. > > > > > > Is it wrong of me to cc the "person" interacting with a bugreport? > > > > > > Is it wrong of me to expect being able to reach that "person"? Easily? > > > > I suppose that in this specific case you wanted to interact with the > > author of the commit, not with the bot or the author of the bot or its > > admin. > > > > It is not wrong, however with the current state of anti-spam measures > > having bots that send mail with a "From: " address that could belong to > > any foreign domain is not a good practice. So the sender address will > > probably have to remain as it is, as arguably a bounce is a better > > feedback here than silently accepting a message that will be ignored. > > > > But the "Reply-To: " field of the bot message could certainly be > > populated with the names and addresse(s) of the author and/or committer > > (and NNN@b.d.o). Would that work for your case? > > Not entirely sure, but yes, that sounds like a sensible solution to me.
I agree, that looks like a good plan. Additionally, Adam D. Barratt from DSA has just made noreply@salsa discard any messages sent to it, on my request. This way, if someone replies to all and forgets to drop noreply@ from the CC: list, there will be no bounce noise.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
