Bug#1019651: "Control: fixed ..." not working
Control: reopen -1 Control: retitle -1 support Control: pseudo-headers in nnn-done@ mails On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 21:49:01 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote: > The main reason why it's not supported is because of the effort required > to handle nnn-done@ in scripts/process rather than a principled > objection to it. [My main goal was to support Control: at submit@ time > where it's critical; support of nnn@ was an added benefit.] It sounds like you wouldn't object to this reopening of the bug then :) -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#1019651: "Control: fixed ..." not working
On Sat, 17 Sep 2022, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:07:55 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote: > > Yes, that's correct; the processing for nnn-done@ doesn't do Control: > > processing. > > People often think that it does, don't notice that it doesn't and then > bugs don't get updated properly. I have seen this a number of times. > > Personally I think it happens often enough that it would be worth > making it work in nnn-done@ messages also, to avoid this problem. The main reason why it's not supported is because of the effort required to handle nnn-done@ in scripts/process rather than a principled objection to it. [My main goal was to support Control: at submit@ time where it's critical; support of nnn@ was an added benefit.] -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com No matter how many instances of white swans we may have observed, this does not justify the conclusion that all swans are white. -- Sir Karl Popper _Logic of Scientific Discovery_
Bug#1019651: "Control: fixed ..." not working
On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:07:55 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote: > Yes, that's correct; the processing for nnn-done@ doesn't do Control: > processing. People often think that it does, don't notice that it doesn't and then bugs don't get updated properly. I have seen this a number of times. Personally I think it happens often enough that it would be worth making it work in nnn-done@ messages also, to avoid this problem. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#1019651: "Control: fixed ..." not working
On Mon, 2022-09-12 at 23:17 -0300, Joao Eriberto Mota Filho wrote: > I noticed in several opportunities that any "Control: fixed" inside > email > messages won't work. See an example here[1]. I needed to send an > extra command > via bts ($ bts fixed 336959 spell/1.0-16) to work. > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/336959#8 > I'm not closing this bug straight away, in case the maintainers have some further input, but fwiw https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting#control says "when sent to sub...@bugs.debian.org or n...@bugs.debian.org" and doesn't mention nnn- done@ being supported, as in your example. Usually one would simply use a "Version" pseudo-header in -done mails. Regards, Adam
Bug#1019651: "Control: fixed ..." not working
Package: bugs.debian.org Severity: normal Dear maintainers, I noticed in several opportunities that any "Control: fixed" inside email messages won't work. See an example here[1]. I needed to send an extra command via bts ($ bts fixed 336959 spell/1.0-16) to work. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/336959#8 Regards, Eriberto
