If I were to set such a thing up, I wouldn't even bother pulling stuff from tech@ and bugs@ at all. Too much work, no real benefit. I would simply have the bug tracker to all new bugs, and maybe keep the bugs@ list open concurrently with the tracker for a period to allow older bugs to be resolved.
Before all that, I would ask if OpenBSD really needs a bug tracker. The project seems to do well even without one, and maybe the devs are satisfied with bugs@ and tech@ already. What issues/problems in workflow will a bug tracker resolve that cannot be covered by bugs@ and tech@ lists? On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:46:25 -0800 Kai Wetlesen <kwetle...@mac.com> wrote: > Agreed, partially, with both of you. It may be possible to automatically > filter > some of the chaff (user errors and support requests in disguise) > in one large batch so to pressed the DB but forwarding mailing list touches > to the bug tracker would make things ugly fast. > > What would be involved to pull the current state of bugs@ and tech@?
