Re: Who gets an email when with bugreports [was: Re: Unauthorised activity surrounding tbb package]
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> I guess, changing semantics of bugnumber[-something]@b.d.o yet again
> will not be considered.
Actually, I think that the way we handle nnn-* is pretty much wrong, but
it's wrong for mainly historical and manpower reasons.
I'm going to put together a bit more firm of a proposal in the next few
weeks, but I think that basically everything but nnn-done@ and
nnn-submitter@ should be no different from mailing nnn@, and until I
allow submitters to opt out of e-mail, mailing nnn-submitter@ should be
no different from e-mailing nnn@ either.
I don't know what to do about contributors to a bug being e-mailed as
well, but maybe even they should also be e-mailed by default... but I've
been making the perfect the enemy of the good for too long here, I think.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities, and seals them
neatly away so that they don't upset people. Nature, in fact, abhors a
lot of things, including vacuums, ships called the Marie Celeste, and
the chuck keys for electric drills.
-- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p166
Reply to: