From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:31:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83o963q620.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1552789070.5272.1@yandex.ru> <1552791707.5272.2@yandex.ru> <1552793646.5272.3@yandex.ru> <1552821396.21432.0@yandex.ru> <83imwhwf4x.fsf@gnu.org> <837ecvux2q.fsf@gnu.org> <9c7cf558-a2d3-951e-d6e1-31b3ad5900cf@yandex.ru> <1553248918.28810.1@yandex.ru> <8336nfrq50.fsf@gnu.org> <83zhpnq8ka.fsf@gnu.org> <6d9c2238-0942-3084-57b6-ab94b5e9a907@yandex.ru> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="72234"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 22 16:37:10 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h7MEH-000Ifg-NO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:37:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58982 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7MEF-0003C3-Jl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:37:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58514) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7MD0-00033u-70 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:35:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:44231) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7M8y-0002YO-2k; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:31:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1823 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h7M8w-0005OF-Ah; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:31:39 -0400 In-reply-to: <6d9c2238-0942-3084-57b6-ab94b5e9a907@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:50:23 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:234587 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:50:23 +0200 > > On 22.03.2019 16:37, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > That sounds like filtering would be a better solution than separation > > into two mailing lists. Doesn't debbugs inject some header into > > messages with a patch? If not, perhaps it should. > > How would it differentiate simple bug reports from bug reports with > inline patches, for example? I don't know. Maybe it cannot. Which means the solution is not perfect, but it doesn't mean it's totally useless, because it does improve the current situation to some extent. > I don't really see how you could make it work well with an email-based > workflow without a separate mailing list or similar. A separate mailing list will make patch review much less convenient, because it will require the reviewer to read and respond to two different threads on two different lists. So I would object to such a change.