> > > > TBH not in terms of your "you act, and I must react" argument. > > It was not an argument, but a statement of fact. >
Well, it "must react" feels a bit loaded. And I see two possible actions here: 1. A person of another project doing a release, triggering a bot to notify us and even create a PR.This also results in a message to the list. 2. A person enabling the bot, causing a one-time "flood" of messages to the list. I assume you were referring to 2.? You were outraged you had to delete those messages? Did you missed/skip the start of the thread, where I merely > asked what was the flood (like I don't think we've have ever > seen) about? > I did indeed miss that - but I am not searching the archives for reading up on the exact wording. Nevertheless... > My remark came after getting a blunt reply that I should > read those messages (though they obviously weren't even > fitted to be read in a mail client) and go figure out (after the > fact) how to not see them. > Maybe the "blunt reply" is the main reason we are still writing here? In a way I hope it is that - and not deletion of a bunch of emails. Care to share your experience of dealing with those hundreds > of bot posts? > Sure. I realized what it is, then I did a search/filter to select them, and deleted them. As said before that took me probably 10s. I am more concerned about the time I spent contributing to this thread. Mine is that either I can get useful info out of them, or I should > not receive them. [Getting automatic messages, and having > them thrown away automatically upon reception seems like a > useless dissipation of heat.] > Oh, I find them very useful. How are they not? And it's not like they get sent out like that every day. The problem is that indeed some messages from "issues@" are > useful (otherwise I would have unsubscribed already...). > Well, the same goes for dependency upgrades.
