[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#461488: marked as done (reportbug: Please be more explicit with X-Debbugs-CC)

Your message dated Sat, 11 Jul 2020 00:19:50 +0200
with message-id <dc033b02-97c4-f265-490a-c467b43c008f@web.de>
and subject line Re: reportbug: Please be more explicit with X-Debbugs-CC
has caused the Debian Bug report #461488,
regarding reportbug: Please be more explicit with X-Debbugs-CC
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
461488: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=461488
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: reportbug
Version: 3.39
Severity: wishlist

Hi,

I've just sent an ITP, that I wanted to Cc to an upstream author. I've
seen the “it will be Cc'd to d-d, per policy” statement, but once I've
added the mail of that author to the X-Debbugs-CC pseudoheader, I've
only seen (through “p - print the message to stdout”) the mail address
that I added, and no mention of d-d.

I then added d-d to the pseudoheader to ensure d-d gets a copy. It was
displayed in the above-mentioned view, fine. Just after hitting “send”,
I've seen that the generated headers are:
| X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
|         Jean-Francois Romang <jeanfrancois.romang@laposte.net>,
|         debian-devel@lists.debian.org

I guess it might make sense to (1) either show that X-Debbugs-Cc already
contains d-d@ (or that it will) when one prompts for the message output
to stdout, (2) or to detect and remove the duplicate.

Maybe debbugs will do the right thing and remove the duplicate itself
[it looks like, at the moment], but I guess that (1) would help people
figuring out what's going to be done.

Thanks for considering.

Cheers,

-- 
Cyril Brulebois

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 7.7.0

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Package: reportbug
> Version: 3.39
> Severity: wishlist

> I guess it might make sense to (1) either show that X-Debbugs-Cc already
> contains d-d@ (or that it will) when one prompts for the message output
> to stdout, (2) or to detect and remove the duplicate.

reportbug now includes X-Debbugs-Cc as pseudoheader and no longer has a
menu option to add it to the headers. This way X-Debbugs-CC handling
should be more transparent the user.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: