Re: bugs and bug tracking

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:

> * Nathan Wagner (nw+pg(at)hydaspes(dot)if(dot)org) wrote:
> > I think I have suggested that there be a way to generate a bug id via
> > email. Presumably someone could just copy that email address to make a
> > not-tracked discussion get a bug id. If the system archived all the
> > lists (not hard) it would be possible to pull the other emails from the
> > thread into the bug (also not hard). As for marking as 'not-a-bug'
> > this can easily be done via whatever mechanism might be used.
> > Something along the lines of:
> >
> > Bug Status: not a bug
>
> If we're providing control messages through email (which I absolutely
> believe needs to be supported), I'd strongly prefer that they be easy to
> write. The above isn't.
>
> A good set of commands to support can be seen here:
>
> https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control
>
> The way debbugs currently works, which I like, is that you email
> NNNN-done(at)bugs(dot)debian(dot)org (NNNN being the bug #) and that automatically
> closes the bug and that email is sent to the bug reporter. Generally,
> this will be in a reply to an email which came from, or at least CC'd,
> NNNN(at)bugs(dot)debian(dot)org, so changing the address to go to -done is quite
> easy.
>

If I understand that correct, it completely breaks the current workflow of
"reply-all"? When I need to comment on a bug, isntead of hitting reply-all,
i should send it to the @bugs address? Or are you saying in those cases you
still hit reply-all but just edit the actual address?

(FWIW, I think editing the actual address is nowhere near as easy as just
adding a Status: <whatever> to the message itself. It's likely easier to
deal with on the *server* side, but it's definitely not easier for the
user. Especially if you're in a MUA that doesn't let you easily edit a mail
address (hello gmail! which is quite a few of our users..)

An example would go something like:
>
> Initial email:
>
> -----------
> From: 1234(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> [...]
> PG should do X
> -----------
>
> Reply email:
>
> -----------
> From: sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net
> To: 1234-done(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)org, control(at)bugs(dot)postgresql(dot)org
>
> tag 1234 wontfix
> thanks
>
> Blah, blah, this is why we don't consider this a bug
> -----------
>

Oh, so debbugs actually breaks the reply-all workflow for *all* emails?

That would mean that bug emails are now handled differently from regular
emails on -hackers for example, wouldn't it? That seems like it's going to
cause issues.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/