Re: spam closes Debian bugs!
Mathieu Roy <email@example.com> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Julian Mehnle <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> Andreas Metzler wrote:
>>>> > So, to start over, I'll just ask: So what? Where's the problem
>>>> > with not being able to *control* bug reports from *everywhere*?
>>>> It limits the locations I can do Debian work from and makes
>>>> interacting with the BTS more work.
>>> Not necessarily. You could carry your private key with you on a USB
>>> key. Or whatever.
>> Signing mails is work.
> Then you clearly use broken tools. I'm sorry but with all the mailers
> I know, signing a mail is just clicking on a button or typing a
> shortcut, and then typing the passphrase.
Your passphrase is too simple. ;-)
>> I am not short sighted either, which is why I have not said "we may
>> not force signing ever in a gazilllion years because *currently* the
>> benefit is minimal" but "...not force signing *now* because
>> Fix the problem once it exist.
> It already happened that a bug report was closed by a spam. So the
> problem does exists, you cant deny it. What you can say it that you are
> questioning the importance of the issue.
Not the importance but the extent, and I claim that one bug being
closed by spam is no problem.
NMUs aren't an insult, they're not an attack, and they're
not something to avoid or be ashamed of.
Anthony Towns in 2004-02 on debian-devel