On 03/ 4/10 10:15 AM, John Beck wrote:
> Scott> I completely understand the need for separate aliases, but flag day
> Scott> and heads-up messages always (or almost always) go to all three, don't
> Scott> they? If so, why not create on-notify-ext at sun.com, which would
> contain
> Scott> just those three aliases? It seems like that small step would avoid a
> Scott> lot of mistakes.
>
> I will consider this, but my reasons for not doing so (until convinced o/w)
> are that I want people to think about what they're doing. We have on several
> occasions had people ask us to take down flag-day messages (which thankfully
> were only sent to the internal list) because they contained proprietary
> information, and the senders did not realize that we publish heads-up and
> flag-day messages externally. And sometimes we want to send messages just
> to the internal lists. With 600+ users, people make mistakes and I don't
> want to make that easier for them; I want them to think about what they're
> doing. Whether or not my methodology for achieving that goal is ideal is
> something I'm will to discuss.
>
> -- John
>
> http://blogs.sun.com/jbeck
>
Actually, the *best* way to handle this, IMO, would involve extending
this to RTI tool and tying it together with the hg hooks.
The heads up message could be put into the RTI, along with an indication
of whether it was appropriate for external consumption or not (a checkbox).
The advocate can at that point review the message, and ask for changes.
Finally, the hg hooks could send out the heads up message that was
collected by the RTI as part of their hooks when the changeset is pushed.
I realize that doing the above would require changes to the tools, but I
think the changes are likely to be modest, and ultimately will help
close this particular loop and give RTI advocates a better opportunity
to review the outbound message as part of the review process.
- Garrett
