On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote:
> * Nathan Wagner (nw...@hydaspes.if.org) wrote: > > I think I have suggested that there be a way to generate a bug id via > > email. Presumably someone could just copy that email address to make a > > not-tracked discussion get a bug id. If the system archived all the > > lists (not hard) it would be possible to pull the other emails from the > > thread into the bug (also not hard). As for marking as 'not-a-bug' > > this can easily be done via whatever mechanism might be used. > > Something along the lines of: > > > > Bug Status: not a bug > > If we're providing control messages through email (which I absolutely > believe needs to be supported), I'd strongly prefer that they be easy to > write. The above isn't. > > A good set of commands to support can be seen here: > > https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control > > The way debbugs currently works, which I like, is that you email > nnnn-d...@bugs.debian.org (NNNN being the bug #) and that automatically > closes the bug and that email is sent to the bug reporter. Generally, > this will be in a reply to an email which came from, or at least CC'd, > n...@bugs.debian.org, so changing the address to go to -done is quite > easy. > If I understand that correct, it completely breaks the current workflow of "reply-all"? When I need to comment on a bug, isntead of hitting reply-all, i should send it to the @bugs address? Or are you saying in those cases you still hit reply-all but just edit the actual address? (FWIW, I think editing the actual address is nowhere near as easy as just adding a Status: <whatever> to the message itself. It's likely easier to deal with on the *server* side, but it's definitely not easier for the user. Especially if you're in a MUA that doesn't let you easily edit a mail address (hello gmail! which is quite a few of our users..) An example would go something like: > > Initial email: > > ----------- > From: 1...@bugs.postgresql.org > [...] > PG should do X > ----------- > > Reply email: > > ----------- > From: sfr...@snowman.net > To: 1234-d...@bugs.postgresql.org, cont...@bugs.postgresql.org > > tag 1234 wontfix > thanks > > Blah, blah, this is why we don't consider this a bug > ----------- > Oh, so debbugs actually breaks the reply-all workflow for *all* emails? That would mean that bug emails are now handled differently from regular emails on -hackers for example, wouldn't it? That seems like it's going to cause issues. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
