Markus Neteler wrote: > On 10/2/07, Maciej Sieczka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Maciej Sieczka wrote:
>>> The oustanding issue hampering the info flow is the >>> inability to CC from the GForge tracker >> I forgot to add that this can be workedaround by enabling >> *all* messages posted from the GForge trackers web form to >> be forwarded to GRASS dev list. Currently it is disabled >> (only the initial report is forwarded) as I was told this >> would be not welcome on such a high-traffic list. Now I'm >> thinking that maybe the extra traffic is worth it, when the >> stake is a better info flow? Please let me know what you think. > I think that the problem is the opposite: > grass-dev -> GForge doesn't work so that list follow-ups are lost. As I have written in my previous post, it was suggested by Intevation that email reply to GForge trackers could be enabled. See the latest message on [1]. If this is done and I also switch on forwarding all messages entered to GForge trackers via the web form, information flow is saved. > This worked for RT well (beside the spam which wasn't caught > at RT while I manage to catch it entering grass-dev again, so > it's a matter of using a good spam filter - see old discussions). [1]http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=85&group_id=1&atid=162 Maciek _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
