From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: jidanni@jidanni.org Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8105: make sure explanation comes along with control message Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:47:40 +0800 Message-ID: <871v2y87xv.fsf@jidanni.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298516819 17831 80.91.229.12 (24 Feb 2011 03:06:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 03:06:59 +0000 (UTC) To: 8105@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 24 04:06:53 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRXY-0007i9-St for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 04:06:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33939 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PsRXX-00025G-SZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 22:06:51 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39794 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PsRXS-000256-At for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 22:06:47 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRXQ-00006Z-TT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 22:06:46 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRXQ-00006U-J7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 22:06:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRFK-00057h-By; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:48:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: jidanni@jidanni.org Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 02:48:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 8105 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.129851567719681 (code B ref -1); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 02:48:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Feb 2011 02:47:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRFE-00057N-Rd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRFC-000577-A9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRF6-0005cy-CC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:49 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:49291) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRF6-0005cp-92 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60987 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PsRF5-000505-Bd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:48 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRF4-0005cW-8j for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:47 -0500 Original-Received: from caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com ([208.97.132.66]:49367 helo=homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PsRF4-0005cJ-2C; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:47:46 -0500 Original-Received: from homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DD557806C; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:47:44 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=jidanni.org; h=from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=jidanni.org ; b=P+s2O1mPlG+PX5HKI3Ifotm42aXcXGPbitl3eGBquHdb64fAHBvTIPMxpSO6 HemFdTeG7QonBvVF6G/tccM0NXRw3UU9Zcp4rKNqNP4Xezh9rRo2TedEK4C7CBLU QsbVwgn7POXeXm1NHrRJRfUDsMKrtdy+6EeZpLSK2dELFWw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=jidanni.org; h=from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s= jidanni.org; bh=0o4JumthcoOna/YPcEgV5x0Ns7I=; b=pSvwCkYAjX44YZHB D/3VDv/UFdKk8IRHjY2ThIG2RY/JQdUML+qTtMj1xOxeoZASmvhY7WBi1bQvQxuv 2d0uCe5yE2Fe2U4Pxc81/Cng1vHpJbfCBvGiBTc5kLj9IZF7GGUZGpt7vRwTZcB+ t+ik4bQxLs3hwMydtSjv9AZf5LQ= Original-Received: from jidanni.org (218-163-2-200.dynamic.hinet.net [218.163.2.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jidanni@jidanni.org) by homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D221E578059; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:47:43 -0800 (PST) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:48:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:44325 Archived-At: Can you make it easier for developers to send some content along with their #1463 acknowledged by developer (control message for bug 1462) #1462 acknowledged by developer (control message for bug 1462) #1465 acknowledged by developer (control message for bug 1462) We just get lots of 'You should be hearing from them with a substantive response shortly, in case you haven't already. If not, please contact them directly.' Which didn't work either.