* bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
@ 2011-05-13 14:30 Drew Adams
2011-05-13 14:58 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
Someone replied to a parenthetical comment in a bug report (#8667).
I replied. Since this side discussion was off-topic for the bug, I changed "RE"
to "OT" in the Subject line. But I left the bug number and the rest of the
Subject as is.
The bug tracker created a new bug:
bug#8670: OT: bug#8667: 24.0.50;`bounds-of-thing-at-point' returns (N . N) for
`comment'
I thought it would keep the same bug # since the # was in the Subject.
Is this a tracker bug or the intended behavior? What can we or can we not
change in the Subject line, without having a new bug created?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 14:30 bug tracker woes/misunderstanding Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 14:58 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 15:18 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2011-05-13 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: emacs-devel
> The bug tracker created a new bug:
> bug#8670: OT: bug#8667: 24.0.50;`bounds-of-thing-at-point' returns (N . N) for
> `comment'
> I thought it would keep the same bug # since the # was in the Subject.
The main and reliable way the tracker uses is the email address you use.
If you send it to <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org, then it won't pay attention
to the subject and will not generate a new bug-number for it.
OTOH if you send an email to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org or
submit@debbugs.gnu.org, this is usually presumed to be a new bug report,
and the subject is checked for some common patterns to catch
common mistakes.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 14:58 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-13 15:18 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 17:14 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Stefan Monnier'; +Cc: emacs-devel
> > The bug tracker created a new bug:
> > bug#8670: OT: bug#8667: 24.0.50;`bounds-of-thing-at-point'
> > returns (N . N) for `comment'
> > I thought it would keep the same bug # since the # was in
> > the Subject.
>
> The main and reliable way the tracker uses is the email
> address you use.
> If you send it to <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org, then it won't pay attention
> to the subject and will not generate a new bug-number for it.
>
> OTOH if you send an email to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org or
> submit@debbugs.gnu.org, this is usually presumed to be a new
> bug report, and the subject is checked for some common patterns to catch
> common mistakes.
Thanks, but I do not understand how what I did in this case differs from what I
always do, except for changing "RE" to "OT".
I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine, I see that
some of the mails I replied to were addressed to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and
others were addressed to <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same
thread! Why?
Hitting `Reply All' works in both cases, but it did not work when I changed the
"RE" to "OT" in the Subject.
See, for example, these two messages in the same thread. Notice the cc fields.
1. http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8653#26
Uses bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org.
2. http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8653#29
Uses 8653@debbugs.gnu.org.
In both cases I just hit `Reply All' and it worked correctly (did not open a new
bug).
I do not understand why some messages I receive in a thread have one address and
others in the same thread have the other address, but `Reply All' to both kinds
seems to work.
In the problematic case I did the same thing (`Reply All') and the address was
bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, but the behavior was not the same as for #1 just above.
What am I missing?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 15:18 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 16:06 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 17:14 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2011-05-13 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: emacs-devel
> I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine,
> I see that some of the mails I replied to were addressed to
> bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and others were addressed to
> <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same thread! Why?
Probably the ones with "bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" are the ones you did not
receive from gnu.org but instead you received directly via a Cc/Bcc/Fcc
to yourself.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-13 16:06 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 16:43 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Stefan Monnier'; +Cc: emacs-devel
> > I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine,
> > I see that some of the mails I replied to were addressed to
> > bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and others were addressed to
> > <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same thread! Why?
>
> Probably the ones with "bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" are the ones
> you did not receive from gnu.org but instead you received directly
> via a Cc/Bcc/Fcc to yourself.
Yes, OK. But what does it mean in terms of what someone should do when
replying? `Reply All' works for all of these, even though
<bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org is not a recipient. And it did not work when all I
changed was "RE" to "OT".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 16:06 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 16:43 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 16:54 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2011-05-13 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: emacs-devel
>> > I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine,
>> > I see that some of the mails I replied to were addressed to
>> > bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and others were addressed to
>> > <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same thread! Why?
>> Probably the ones with "bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" are the ones
>> you did not receive from gnu.org but instead you received directly
>> via a Cc/Bcc/Fcc to yourself.
> Yes, OK. But what does it mean in terms of what someone should do when
> replying?
What it mostly means is that you shouldn't use *Cc when sending bug
reports to Debbugs (you can use "X-debbugs-cc" instead). This is
clearly not the best aspect of Debbugs.
> `Reply All' works for all of these, even though
> <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org is not a recipient.
It only works thanks to the few sanity checks we perform when receiving
"new" bug-reports.
> And it did not work when all I changed was "RE" to "OT".
The sanity checks apparently assume that a reply should start with
"re:".
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 16:43 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-13 16:54 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 18:19 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Stefan Monnier'; +Cc: emacs-devel
> > Yes, OK. But what does it mean in terms of what someone
> > should do when replying?
>
> What it mostly means is that you shouldn't use *Cc when sending bug
> reports to Debbugs (you can use "X-debbugs-cc" instead). This is
> clearly not the best aspect of Debbugs.
Sorry, I don't know how to do that using my mail client (Outlook 2003; still
very common). My choices are `Reply', `Reply All', and `Forward'. I can edit
To, Cc, and Subject fields, of course, but I prefer not to have to do that each
time I reply, just to satisfy the bug tracker.
> > `Reply All' works for all of these, even though
> > <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org is not a recipient.
>
> It only works thanks to the few sanity checks we perform when
> receiving "new" bug-reports.
Well, thank goodness you do that. Creating a new bug report each time someone
hits `Reply' would be pretty brain-dead (i.e., not too sane).
> > And it did not work when all I changed was "RE" to "OT".
>
> The sanity checks apparently assume that a reply should start with
> "re:".
That was my guess too. So the answer is to not remove "RE:". I imagine it is
OK to add "OT", but not to replace "RE:" with "OT:".
Depending on "RE:" for sanity sounds pretty fragile, but I can certainly live
with that. This should be documented for users somewhere, if it isn't already.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 15:18 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-13 17:14 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2011-05-13 17:32 ` Drew Adams
1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stephen J. Turnbull @ 2011-05-13 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: 'Stefan Monnier', emacs-devel
Drew Adams writes:
> Thanks, but I do not understand how what I did in this case differs
> from what I always do, except for changing "RE" to "OT".
"The doctor says, 'If it hurts when you do that, stop doing it.'"
Explanation:
Looking at the subject is heuristic. Typically the rule is: the bug
number must be the first thing in the subject in exactly the same
format as the tracker produces, except for "RE:" stripping. "OT" not
a bug number, so the tracker assumes it's new bug.
> I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine,
> I see that some of the mails I replied to were addressed to
> bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and others were addressed to
> <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same thread! Why?
Why not? It works fine as long as you don't try to be smart with the
subject line. Some heuristic is necessary because copies of bug
messages with the generic To: address are always going to exist, and
people *will* reply to those.
> I do not understand why some messages I receive in a thread have
> one address and others in the same thread have the other address,
Because some are produced by the tracker itself (ie, when you are
subscribed to the bug), and others are initial reports or replies that
arrive in your inbox by some other route (self-cc of various kinds,
mailing lists, etc).
> but `Reply All' to both kinds seems to work.
<bugnb>@ works by protocol (and is reliable). bug-gnu-emacs@ works by
heuristic (don't push your luck!)
> What am I missing?
;-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 17:14 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
@ 2011-05-13 17:32 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-05-13 19:57 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Stephen J. Turnbull'; +Cc: 'Stefan Monnier', emacs-devel
> > Thanks, but I do not understand how what I did in this case differs
> > from what I always do, except for changing "RE" to "OT".
>
> "The doctor says, 'If it hurts when you do that, stop doing it.'"
My question was what was being done that caused this hurt. Was it just using
"OT"? Using "OT" in place of "RE"? Position of "OT/RE" within the Subject?
Something else?
> Explanation:
> Looking at the subject is heuristic. Typically the rule is: the bug
> number must be the first thing in the subject in exactly the same
> format as the tracker produces, except for "RE:" stripping. "OT" not
> a bug number, so the tracker assumes it's new bug.
Great. Please add your explanation as doc, wherever the bug tracker is
documented (assuming this info is not already there).
> > I just hit `Reply All', as usual. Looking at past replies of mine,
> > I see that some of the mails I replied to were addressed to
> > bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and others were addressed to
> > <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org - and this within the same thread! Why?
>
> Why not? It works fine as long as you don't try to be smart with the
> subject line.
Undocumented (?). What is "being smart"? What should users avoid wrt changes
to the Subject line and other fields? Apparently (?) one should not remove "RE"
from the beginning of the line (or even move it to the right, from the
beginning?). Please document just what one should not do - IOW, define "being
smart".
> Some heuristic is necessary because copies of bug
> messages with the generic To: address are always going to exist, and
> people *will* reply to those.
No argument with why things are implemented the way they are. The question is
from a user point of view: what to do/not do. That implementation sounds
fragile to me, but I'm not trying to reimplement or redesign it. I'm just
trying to understand how to use it. You've heard of users, right?
> > but `Reply All' to both kinds seems to work.
>
> <bugnb>@ works by protocol (and is reliable). bug-gnu-emacs@ works by
> heuristic (don't push your luck!)
Users will use `Reply' and `Reply All'. Please document what changes to the
Subject line or other fields are no-no's.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 17:32 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-05-13 18:02 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 19:57 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2011-05-13 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: stephen, monnier, emacs-devel
> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:32:01 -0700
> Cc: 'Stefan Monnier' <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>
> Great. Please add your explanation as doc, wherever the bug tracker is
> documented (assuming this info is not already there).
It is already there (admin/notes/bugtracker):
** How do I reply to an existing bug report?
Reply to 123@debbugs.gnu.org, replacing 123 with the number
of the bug you are interested in. NB this only sends mail to the
bug-list, it does NOT (?) send a CC to the original bug submitter.
So you need to explicitly CC him/her (and anyone else you like).
...
Do NOT send a separate copy to the bug list address, since this may
generate a new report. The only time to send mail to the bug list
address is to create a new report.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2011-05-13 18:02 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 18:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 18:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Eli Zaretskii'; +Cc: stephen, monnier, emacs-devel
> > Great. Please add your explanation as doc, wherever the
> > bug tracker is documented (assuming this info is not already there).
>
> It is already there (admin/notes/bugtracker):
>
> ** How do I reply to an existing bug report?
> Reply to 123@debbugs.gnu.org...
Nope, but thanks for playing, Eli. That does not include the info from
Stephen's explanation.
1. Users _will_ hit `Reply' and `Reply All'. And they will reply to direct
replies to them from other users, i.e., mail that comes from other users and not
from the bug tracker.
Please add information about what to do when you reply to a message that has
bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, and not <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org, as a recipient.
It is not enough to tell users that they must always edit the recipient
bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, replacing it with <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org. That is
obviously not going to happen - including for users such as Eli Zaretskii.
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8653#26
2. Please add information about what kinds of editing of the Subject line are
no-no's (at least in the case where the recipient is bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org).
E.g., do not remove "RE:", do not move "RE:" to the right (?),...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 16:54 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 18:19 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 18:25 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2011-05-13 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: emacs-devel
>> It only works thanks to the few sanity checks we perform when
>> receiving "new" bug-reports.
> Well, thank goodness you do that. Creating a new bug report each time
> someone hits `Reply' would be pretty brain-dead (i.e., not too sane).
That's only when someone hits "reply" on a message he received via Cc.
> That was my guess too. So the answer is to not remove "RE:".
> I imagine it is OK to add "OT", but not to replace "RE:" with "OT:".
Actually, what you should do for such OT posts is to not send them to
the bug-tracker, since they don't belong there.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 18:19 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-13 18:25 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Stefan Monnier'; +Cc: emacs-devel
> > That was my guess too. So the answer is to not remove "RE:".
> > I imagine it is OK to add "OT", but not to replace "RE:" with "OT:".
>
> Actually, what you should do for such OT posts is to not send them to
> the bug-tracker, since they don't belong there.
Well, sure. The question is not about off-topic posts but about kosher edits of
the Subject line. s/OT/OTHER, where OTHER is not RE.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 18:02 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 18:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-05-13 19:11 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2011-05-13 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: stephen, monnier, emacs-devel
> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Cc: <stephen@xemacs.org>, <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:02:27 -0700
>
> > > Great. Please add your explanation as doc, wherever the
> > > bug tracker is documented (assuming this info is not already there).
> >
> > It is already there (admin/notes/bugtracker):
> >
> > ** How do I reply to an existing bug report?
> > Reply to 123@debbugs.gnu.org...
>
> Nope, but thanks for playing, Eli.
Why am I not surprised?
> That does not include the info from Stephen's explanation.
Yes, it does, if you read it carefully.
> 1. Users _will_ hit `Reply' and `Reply All'. And they will reply to direct
> replies to them from other users, i.e., mail that comes from other users and not
> from the bug tracker.
And that is okay. It works.
> It is not enough to tell users that they must always edit the recipient
> bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, replacing it with <bugnb>@debbugs.gnu.org. That is
> obviously not going to happen - including for users such as Eli Zaretskii.
> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8653#26
Users such as Eli Zaretskii know how to be careful about this. So
they are allowed some leeway. Users such as Drew Adams, who don't
always know what they are doing (or pretend they don't), should follow
the instructions to the letter.
> 2. Please add information about what kinds of editing of the Subject line are
> no-no's (at least in the case where the recipient is bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org).
No edits are allowed, period.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 18:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2011-05-13 19:11 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 19:24 ` PJ Weisberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2011-05-13 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Eli Zaretskii'; +Cc: stephen, monnier, emacs-devel
> > 2. Please add information about what kinds of editing of
> > the Subject line are no-no's (at least in the case where the
> > recipient is bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org).
>
> No edits are allowed, period.
Really? I don't think so. Unless by "allowed" you mean something other than
"will work". Are you saying that _any_ editing of the Subject line will cause
the message not to be handled correctly?
If that is the case, then please say so in the help. Perhaps something like:
"This bug tracker is so fragile that if you edit the Subject
line at all then your message will not be handled correctly."
(Again, this is for the case where the recipient is bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org.)
You might want to substitute something else for "fragile", if that is too
sensitive. "Mickey Mouse", perhaps?
> Users such as Eli Zaretskii know how to be careful about this. So
> they are allowed some leeway. Users such as Drew Adams, who don't
> always know what they are doing (or pretend they don't), should follow
> the instructions to the letter.
Then please add something about how the above is not really true, that advanced
users can carefully edit the Subject line. Perhaps something like this:
"Actually, this is true only for uninitiated users such as
Drew Adams, who don't know what they're doing. If you think
you can be careful about editing the Subject line and you
would like to know how and be allowed leeway to do so, then
please contact Eli Zaretskii."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 19:11 ` Drew Adams
@ 2011-05-13 19:24 ` PJ Weisberg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: PJ Weisberg @ 2011-05-13 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams
Cc: Eli Zaretskii, emacs-devel@gnu.org, stephen@xemacs.org,
monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
On Friday, May 13, 2011, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote:
>> > 2. Please add information about what kinds of editing of
>> > the Subject line are no-no's (at least in the case where the
>> > recipient is bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org).
>>
>> No edits are allowed, period.
>
> Really? I don't think so. Unless by "allowed" you mean something other than
> "will work". Are you saying that _any_ editing of the Subject line will cause
> the message not to be handled correctly?
How about, "No edits are allowed, but some automatic checks are used
to compensate for common errors. As with all undocumented features,
the rule is 'don't push your luck'?"
--
-PJ
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* RE: bug tracker woes/misunderstanding
2011-05-13 17:32 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2011-05-13 19:57 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Stephen J. Turnbull @ 2011-05-13 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: 'Stefan Monnier', emacs-devel
Drew Adams writes:
> Great. Please add your explanation as doc, wherever the bug tracker is
> documented (assuming this info is not already there).
Adding the explanation is a bad idea; it will encourage users to try
various "useful" changes as justified by their understanding of a
process accurately described only by its source code, and not promised
by the tracker maintainers.
> I'm just trying to understand how to use it.
No, you're trying to go beyond "use". Handling OT material in an
issue is *not* part of the job description of an issue tracker.
Issues are not the same as mailing list threads, and the appropriate
way for a user to present OT material is to find an appropriate new
channel, either a new issue or a different medium such as a mailing
list.
The feature of displaying a per-message subject could be useful (eg,
to announce availability of a patch or test case), but AFAICT it's
rarely used in debbugs (possibly because many other trackers don't
support it at all, they have a single subject for the whole issue).
> Users will use `Reply' and `Reply All'. Please document what changes to the
> Subject line or other fields are no-no's.
All changes to header fields, except adding or removing addressees,
are forbidden to users of `Reply' and `Reply All'.
As Eli points out, the contents of admin/notes/bugtracker already say
what should be said. Use the bug number address. Everything else is
unsupported, although some effort is made to accomodate naive usage of
`Reply' (ie, simply typing a message body and sending, without mucking
with the headers).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-13 19:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-13 14:30 bug tracker woes/misunderstanding Drew Adams
2011-05-13 14:58 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 15:18 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 16:06 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 16:43 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 16:54 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 18:19 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-13 18:25 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 17:14 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2011-05-13 17:32 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-05-13 18:02 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 18:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-05-13 19:11 ` Drew Adams
2011-05-13 19:24 ` PJ Weisberg
2011-05-13 19:57 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).