Re: maintainers with bad email addresses
Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes ("maintainers with bad email addresses"):
> I think it should be a requirement that Debian maintainers have email
> addresses which accept all validly formatted email, at least in
> response to bug-reporting discussions.
I agree.
> Is this controversial?
No.
If you were to come up with a specific complaint we might be able to
tell whether you really did mean to ignite the DUL flamewar again, or
whether there is some other kind of problem.
Branden Robinson writes ("Re: maintainers with bad email addresses"):
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 02:19:28PM -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > I think it should be a requirement that Debian maintainers have email
> > addresses which accept all validly formatted email, at least in
> > response to bug-reporting discussions. Is this controversial?
>
> Yes, even if it is reasonable.
Please don't listen to Branden.
> There is, unfortunately, a very vocal minority of developers who reserve
> the right to cackle in glee as perfect valid non-spam email messages are
> bounced or destroyed in the name of spam control.
I think this is false. To prove me wrong, please produce messages
from at least two different developers where they `reserve the right
to cackle in glee' (or moral equivalent). As you say, you should do
so on -project or -devel.
> In other news, this topic is probably more germane to -project than
> -policy. Policy has more to do with what packages do than what maintainers
> do (though there are gray areas).
I didn't think Thomas Bushnell's message was about DUL.
Ian.
Reply to: