On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > devscripts (bts.1) reads: > > | The owner of a bug accepts the responsibility of dealing with it, and > > | will receive all of the email corresponding to the bug instead of the > > | usual maintainer. > > > > However, Don said 8 months ago in #327608 that this isn't true: > > |Owner is just a means of indicating who is working on a bug. > > Hi Don, > can you please confirm what you wrote at the end of #327608, namely > that the "owner" command does not make you automatically subscribed to > the bug report and additionally that it does not have any functional > effect beside declaring who is working on the bug?
Right; currently all it does is indicate who is working on the bug. > If the patch sounds fine to you it would be worth to change the > documentation of the BTS web interface accordingly. Yeah, I've got this in the pipeline. > +The owner of a bug accepts the responsibility of dealing with it. Note that > the > +"owner" of a bug does not receive automatically all of the email > corresponding > +to the bug; use "subscribe" to achieve that. If subscribe is a 'bts' command that sends a mail to bugnum-subscribe, yeah, sounds good. [There isn't a subscribe control@ command.] Don Armstrong -- I'd sign up in a hot second for any cellular company whose motto was: "We're less horrible than a root canal with a cold chisel." -- Cory Doctorow http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
