Re: NM non-process

To: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: NM non-process
From: Josip Rodin <joy@srce.hr>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:51:31 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 20030807155131.GA755@prvidomaci.srce.hr>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20030806215608.GD19452@mails.so.argh.org>
References: <3F1BEF24.7030400@twcny.rr.com> <20030721154143.GG3815@mails.so.argh.org> <20030721160056.GB28212@doc.ic.ac.uk> <20030721163610.GA10704@mails.so.argh.org> <20030721173624.GA21733@doc.ic.ac.uk> <20030721201714.GD14411@mails.so.argh.org> <20030721205858.GG4281@doc.ic.ac.uk> <20030721223144.GA17976@mails.so.argh.org> <[🔎] 20030806161608.GF7024@prvidomaci.srce.hr> <[🔎] 20030806215608.GD19452@mails.so.argh.org>

On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:56:08PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Heh :) If I hadn't responded to it manually, it would have gotten ignored
> > as spam (nobody cared enough to write a nice formail -r message because it
> > happens rarely enough and the spambounces would waste us more resources).
> > [policy of d-d-a]
> 
> Yes, I can see the problem. However, it would have helped me much if
> this policy would have been clearly stated at
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/ (should I open a bug,
> or can it be fixed without?).

Please file a minor bug on listarchives, I'll get to it by tonight.

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to:

References:
- Re: NM non-process
  - From: Josip Rodin <joy@srce.hr>
- Re: NM non-process
  - From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Getting patches into packages, thought and ideas [Was: Re: About NM and Next Release]
Next by Date: Re: About NM and Next Release
Previous by thread: Re: NM non-process
Next by thread: Re: NM non-process
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread