Bug#434149: Should maintainers receive copies of their own BTS mails?
Le dimanche 22 juillet 2007 à 22:18 +0200, Oleg Verych a écrit :
> >> If I want the bug reporter to see the message, I send it to
> >> -submitter, otherwise I expect interested parties to have subscribed
> >> to the bug or otherwise be keeping track of it. It's the same reason
> >> why I don't Cc: people who post to mailing lists.
> ... unless they have mail-followup-to setup, isn't it?
Mail-Followup-To isn't a standard of any kind. It isn't implemented in
half of user agents.
> > Even when they are explicitly requesting it? Then you can bet you will
> > never reach them.
> 4. `Requesting' must be defined.
Saying "please CC me on your replies" seems like a good start, but Don
knowingly ignored it.
> When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to
> which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent.
> So it's a weak request anyway.
The BTS adds a "Reply-To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org"
to the mail sent to the maintainer. Respecting it is as easy as clicking
"reply" in any user agent. This means Don, when replying to BTS emails,
explicitly removes the submitter's address from the recipient list.
> > One of the few good things with Bugzilla is, when you add a comment, you
> > get added to the CC list *unless you click the appropriate checkbox*.
> > This is straightforward and absolutely obvious for users. I don't
> > understand what could be wrong in mimicking it.
> It's all about convention and relevant policy.
No, it's about common sense, which the BTS doesn't always follow.
> So, what about this.
This sounds like an improvement, but I fail to see what it brings over
the roundup behaviour (forging From: headers), which is the only one to
deal with both broken MUAs and stupid users.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.