From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10134: acknowledged by developer (close 10134) | [debbugs-tracker] Processed: close 10134 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:01:45 -0800 Message-ID: <2E387B45B1724D3899F54DF866A6375C@us.oracle.com> References: <87pqdltqjh.fsf@gnu.org><7B067E32FA18444AA4202D7EA0562F3E@us.oracle.com><87lio98e6x.fsf@gnu.org><9A88236690454156855D422BCF7FD65E@us.oracle.com> <87ipjczrkf.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1329019367 6963 80.91.229.3 (12 Feb 2012 04:02:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10134@debbugs.gnu.org, 'Chong Yidong' , 'Bob Proulx' To: "'Jason Rumney'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 12 05:02:46 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQeD-0003Ek-4O for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:02:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38132 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQeC-0000lF-CW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:02:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45088) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQeA-0000l3-3A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:02:42 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQe8-00021c-NQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:02:41 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:33011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQe8-00021Y-Kg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:02:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQfS-0001xq-Jk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:04:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:04:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10134 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10134-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10134.13290194087506 (code B ref 10134); Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:04:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10134) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Feb 2012 04:03:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36634 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQet-0001x0-EA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:03:28 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:39272) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RwQer-0001wm-LY for 10134@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:03:26 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q1C41tGK024317; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:01:56 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1C41rIZ016066 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:01:54 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt109.oracle.com (abhmt109.oracle.com [141.146.116.61]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q1C41rJB010545; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:01:53 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.51.171) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:01:53 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87ipjczrkf.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: AczpMiSvWuhAwrQBQkaS2XecVQ9Y6AABX7yQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A020204.4F3739B5.0043,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:56822 Archived-At: > > The maintainer who closes a report should ensure, probably > > by sending a separate message, that the user who reported > > the bug knows why it is being closed. > > Which is exactly what happened, according to your comment: > > > (Yes, I read the bug thread and I realize the bug has now > > been fixed.) Uh, nope. I wrote that in my message that pointed out that I received no message explaining the closure. I wrote it _after_ getting the automatic closure message, looking up the bug number, and consulting the thread. After all that, yes, I realized that bug #10134 was one that had been fixed. The point of the guideline is for the closer to ensure that the filer knows why it is being closed before closing. The point of sending a separate message is to let the filer connect the reason/status with the bug number, without having to traipse through the thread again. The last message in the thread, before the automatic closure message, was 2011/12/25, over a month and a half ago. Had the no-reason automatic message come on that day or, say, Dec 26th, things might have been a bit different in terms of my awareness of this bug and its status. Between just 2012/01/01 and today there have been 280 messages for Emacs bugs I filed. Perhaps you can understand that a message letting me know that this bug was fixed would have been helpful. And as I said, in the case where a bug is fixed, that info alone is sometimes sufficient for the filer, so perhaps the automatic closure message could include that info.