Who gets an email when with bugreports [was: Re: Unauthorised activity surrounding tbb package]
Am 18.01.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 01:07:35PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:09:34AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 04:48:33PM +0000, Steven Capper wrote:
>>>> we have had no discussion
>>>> over #773359; your response is effectively placing words in my mouth
>>>> and I will not tolerate that. To confound matters, I wasn't even CC'ed
>>>> in on the response!
>>> Usually it is expected that the maintainer receives every posting to the
>>> bugs of the package he maintains. So there was no real point to add an
>>> additional CC.
>> The followups were sent to -submitter which unfortunately explicitly
>> doesn't CC the maintainer (I guess the main intended use case is for the
>> maintainer to talk to the submitter), an extra CC needs to be added to
>> include the maintainer.
> OK, that's a bit unfortunate. On the other hand the fact that Steven as
> maintainer did not checked the bug log of an RC bug for nearly one month
> (and he received the original bug report) remains a good reason for
> anybody else who is interested in the Jessie release to react.
I think the semantics of email@example.com are very unfortunate. My
*intuition* is always making me believe that everything sent to
firstname.lastname@example.org should go to /everbody involved in the
But that's no so.
>From that fact stem (as far as my understanding goes) a lot of rules who
gets what when sending email to email@example.com.
And additionally there's the subscription to a bug as well.
I have regularly problems with people posting to bugreports I'm
participating in, that I don't get, because I'm not subscribed to them
(so now I should be managing subscriptions to all bugs I've ever
participated in...) or because reporters didn't write to the right
firstname.lastname@example.org and Cc: addresses, or because they didn't
care or because...
That's bad, because - as shown in the thread off which this posting is
forking off - reasoning about and discussion in bugreports fades off
into interpretations about why one did or did not get an email and
that's not helpful when dealing with potentially (emotionally) sensitive
I guess, changing semantics of bugnumber[-something]@b.d.o yet again
will not be considered. But I think a lot of unnecessary friction stems
from the unclear or unintuitive or "not defined where people would see
I do not want this observation be understood as a critique of the people
who are involved in the creation of those rules. There might be many
reason for them being so, many of which I have no insight into (but I am
certainly appreciating that work very much).