On 18.05.2024 22.58, Xiyue Deng wrote: > Using the use case in elpa-debian-el as an example, we handle CCing > oneself in ELisp, so we assume reportbug is invoked without "list-cc-me" > by not passing that argument. However, if the user has a > "~/.reportbugrc" with "list-cc-me" in it, it will break this assumption, > and reportbug ended up having it's own self CC and elpa-debian-el added > another self CC, which would be confusing to users. If we have an > option to disable loading "~/.reportbugrc" we can avoid this situation.
Well, adding a way to override the "list-cc-me" would also avoid this situation, wouldn't it? What I'm trying to discuss is the advantages and disadvantages of this alternative approach compared to your proposal. "Disable configuration files" seems like a very unspecific override (that might also break stuff other tools rely upon) to ask for if a more specific one would do. Or maybe no change is actually needed at all, because your case is already resolved? > The same applies to other arguments that user may set but affect the > assumptions of other programs. I think it would be helpful if there was a real application use case to discuss here. If there aren't any (valid) assumptions by other programs that we are breaking then I don't think there is any bug and this should be closed. Since this is about cc-related options, are you already including the -x (or --no-cc) option when invoking reportbug? Reportbug doesn't actually read list-cc from its configuration file(s). It does read cc and list-cc-me.
