* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > > If you want such an API, I won't stop you from using it, but I will not > > > use it myself. Please put in message-body commands as well. > > > > So, unsurprisingly, debbugs does support all commands that can be sent > > to control@ also through the n...@bugs.postgresql.org system; the command > > simply needs to be prefixed with 'Control: ' and then '-1' can be used > > as the bug number (so you don't have to figure out what the right number > > is, etc), like so: > > > > Control: close -1 > > Control: tags -1 wontfix > > Supposedly we will want our traffic to still flow via > pgsql-b...@postgresql.org, so the trick of grabbing the bug number from > the To address will not be available, will it?
There are a few different ways which we could integrate with pgsql-bugs, depending on exactly what we want. The Debian debbugs system currently emails to the following lists: debian-bugs-closed - All emails which close bugs debian-bugs-dist - All submitted bug reports and further info debian-bugs-forwarded - Bug report forwarded upstream emails debian-bugs-rc - All mail regarding release critical bugs I'm sure we could create more. The emails which go through debbugs will have the bug # pre-pended to the Subject: line. > Hmm, I guess we could have the bug form add > To: n...@bugs.postgresql.org > CC: pgsql-b...@postgresql.org > as headers, which should work for most people (since we reply-all), Josh > Berkus being the exception. My thinking was that we'd have the form email sub...@bugs.postgresql.org and then have pgsql-bugs receive the emails that go to debian-bugs-dist (basically, all email that goes through the system). That way, the emails which hit pgsql-bugs can be responded to with updates, changes, etc. To avoid duplicate emails hitting pgsql-bugs, we might need to put in place something that checks if pgsql-bugs was on the To: or Cc: line and, if so, the email isn't sent to it again (honestly, for all I know, debbugs might even support doing exactly that already..). Perhaps it'd be better to have pgsql-bugs be the "Package owner", who also gets emails about bug activity on their packages. That way, we could have a 'jdbc' package whose owner is pgsql-jdbc and pgsql-bugs wouldn't end up with that bug traffic (which, I believe, is what we'd want...). I'll ask Don what suggestions he has regarding the best approach. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature