Re: Reopening bug closed due to SPAM
On 21/07/05, Adeodato Simó <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> * Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña [Thu, 21 Jul 2005 00:31:48 +0200]:
> > If spam e-mail is going to start closing our Bugs in the BTS then we
> > should start thinking about implementing authentication checks in the
> > BTS... like for example: do not allow control messages or -close
> > messages with no attached (valid) GPG/PGP signatures (from a valid
> > developer?)"
> I see much more feasible to require a pseudo-header: less cumbersome,
> higher probability of getting implemented, and more in accordance with
> the philosophy of our BTS.
> And such header is now needed to make a versioned closes, so it
> doesn't sound too disruptive to require it for every mail to -done (at
> least the Source: one, Source-Version could be optional).
And how about a nice header for -done which is something to the effect
of 'mark as spam & archive now & prevent replies etc unless reopened',
or let us tag bugs as 'spam' (which would also be an alias for close)
and on the bug summary pages instead of all the spam bugs on package
pages (mainly 'general' i'd say) it'd appear in it's own little
section, and can autoarchive in 28 days without mixing with other
My two cents
> Adeodato Simó
> EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
> Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately
> explained by stupidity.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
Blogging @ http://nigelj.blogspot.com
Proud Debian & FOSS User
Debian Maintainer of: html2ps & ipkungfu