Bug#545996: #545996: please inform submitters they need to subs cribe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Frans Pop wrote:
> Holger Levsen wrote:
>> But I also think the acknowledgement mail should contain the information
>> that the submitter is not being subscribed by default and how s/he can
>> subscribe.
>
> IMHO this is very wrong: the user has already taken the trouble to report
> the bug. We should not make him/her jump through extra hoops just so he
> can participate in the resolution of the bug. And he should also not run
> the risk of missing requests for additional information from the package
> maintainer if he fails to subscribe.
[...]
> I'm very much in favor of having submitters receive mails by default, at
> least for follow-ups, but IMO also for status changes.
>
> Only too often have I missed the fact that a maintainer silently changed
> the priority of a bug I thought was RC. That should not happen. The
> submitter should be informed so he can argue against the change if he
> feels it's wrong.
I fully agree. IMHO, the sane default action on part of the BTS is to
automatically subscribe the the OP of the bug report and to provide a
simple means to unsubscribe. Ie., the acknowledgement mail should
contain the information of how to *un*subscribe from the report.
Speaking just for myself, I have too often not received follow up
questions to a bug report or only found them at a much later time and
'by accident' via the web interface. I don't blame this on the
developers though, because I happen to forget to set the right cc's or
to's of a mail rather to often myself.
I think the BTS should make it as simple as possible to 'do the right
thing', ie. keep the maintainer and the reporter of a bug informed.
Cheers,
Johannes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkqqXKIACgkQC1NzPRl9qEVH1ACeMxW7OUzPqYBw7YQQKZdoST4Y
/WwAnj6ZA2+iQL/rnaelrHi7DbWofeK4
=lpLO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: