On Wednesday, 7 February 2018 09:43:27 CET Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 01 February 2018 21:06:05 Luigi Toscano wrote: > > Pali, bugzilla email works for many developers and this is the first time > > that I heard issues with that. If it does not work with your email, it's > > possible to redirect the notifications to a mailing list (like this; it > > works for example for Okular). > > Emails from bugzilla are sent but mangled, which are hard to view/filter > or process. I reported this bug and nobody want to fix it: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359603
For reference, the change applied (the address of emails from bugzilla contains bugzilla_nore...@kde.org) are needed to avoid rejections from major email providers. It's bad and sad, but it's as it is. > > Also, you can periodically check queries on the website for updated/new > > bugs. > Yes, I have custom saved searches and occasionally do that. > > > Given that contributors expect to use bugzilla, not looking at it is not > > doing a favor to the community. > > Sorry, but I really do not have enough time to deal with buggy software > which makes my work even harder. And also I do not have time to hack my > MDA+MUA to start repairing "hard-to-process" kde bugzilla emails. What exactly breaks your workflow? Bugzilla provides headers with all the information, if needed (and kmail shows some of them). You see the name of the person. I receive bugs from bugzilla too, either through emails or directly. How does the workflow is broken exactly ? > > I got answer that I should ignore emails RFCs (e.g. RFC5322), but sorry > all my email software is written according RFC2822 or RFC5322. Therefore > I cannot easily ignore them. That's not all the story and the problem is more complicated. Not implementing the change means rejected emails. Sad, I don't like it too, but I don't see how this specific change is impacting any bugzilla workflow heavily. -- Luigi