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 xxx@bugs.debian.org are very unfortunate. My
*intuition* is always making me believe that everything sent to
bugnumber@bugs.debian.org should go to /everbody involved in the
bugreport's thread/.
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 bugnumber-something@bugs.debian.org.
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
bugnumber-***@bugs.debian.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
bugs.
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
them" semantics.
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).
*t
Reply to: