Re: bugs and bug tracking

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)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 NNN(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)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-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)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: NNN(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> CC: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)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 submit(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)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