Mail that shuld not be sent here

Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

Here are some examples of the sort of message which the bug tracker is
sending to emacs-devel or bug-gnu-emacs.  I think it should be fixed
to stop sending these messages to those lists.


X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.0
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:20:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: don@donarmstrong.com (Emacs bug Tracking System)
To: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
Message-ID: <handler.210.D210.121210289112986.ackdone@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_1212103214-14878-0"
Cc: 
Subject: bug#210: marked as done (Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_1212103214-14878-0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8


Your message dated Thu, 29 May 2008 19:13:02 -0400
with message-id <18495.14462.80225.521033@fencepost.gnu.org>
and subject line Re: Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
has caused the Emacs bug report #210,
regarding Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact don@donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


--=20
210: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D210
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact don@donarmstrong.com with problems

------------=_1212103214-14878-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=4.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 9 May 2008 19:43:53 +0000
Received: from mx10.gnu.org (mail.gnu.org [199.232.76.166])
	by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m49JhnaI026862
	for <submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Fri, 9 May 2008 12:43:50 -0700
Received: from mail.fsf.org ([140.186.70.13]:37325)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <jag@fsf.org>)
	id 1JuYVQ-0000a1-R3
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 15:43:48 -0400
Received: from terminus-est.gnu.org ([66.92.78.210]:57352 helo=[192.168.0.245])
	by mail.fsf.org with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <jag@fsf.org>)
	id 1JuYVP-0000p3-Vh
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 15:43:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4824AA1C.5000006@fsf.org>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 15:46:36 -0400
From: "Joshua 'jag' Ginsberg" <jag@fsf.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Subject: Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-detected-kernel: by mail.fsf.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3)
X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
X-GNU-Loop: 1

This is a test message. Kindly ignore it please. Thanks!

-jag



------------=_1212103214-14878-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Received: (at 210-done) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 29 May 2008 23:14:51 +0000
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10])
	by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m4TNEmbJ012980
	for <210-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Thu, 29 May 2008 16:14:49 -0700
Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <rgm@gnu.org>)
	id 1K1rIs-0001T8-49; Thu, 29 May 2008 19:13:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <18495.14462.80225.521033@fencepost.gnu.org>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 19:13:02 -0400
From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
To: 210-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
Subject: Re: Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
X-Attribution: GM
X-Mailer: VM (www.wonderworks.com/vm), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs)
X-Hue: cyan
X-Ran: #,.5hY#(^'cit$0ua\9!0xQhfB^yO8so1E?L}aF_:W/LP<rxZNbI@2Ursg|`xq+p*_9N5?


close test bug.


------------=_1212103214-14878-0--



X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.0
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:30:03 -0700
From: don@donarmstrong.com (Emacs bug Tracking System)
To: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <18495.14860.232772.369884@fencepost.gnu.org>
Message-ID: <handler.s.C.121210328915368.transcript@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>
Cc: Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
Subject: Processed: Re: compilation problems on mac os x

Processing commands for control@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com:

> tag 302 wontfix
bug#302: compilation problems on mac os x
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix

>
End of message, stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Don Armstrong
(administrator, Emacs bugs database)

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Fri, 30 May 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
> Here are some examples of the sort of message which the bug tracker
> is sending to emacs-devel or bug-gnu-emacs. I think it should be
> fixed to stop sending these messages to those lists.

The first corresponds to the bug actually being closed; it isn't a
canned mail, but the concatenation of the original report, the message
that caused the bug to be closed, and an expanatory text that says
what has been done.

> Your message dated Thu, 29 May 2008 19:13:02 -0400
> with message-id <18495.14462.80225.521033@fencepost.gnu.org>
> and subject line Re: Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
> has caused the Emacs bug report #210,
> regarding Testing debbugs setup -- please ignore
> to be marked as done.

[...]

> X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
> X-GNU-Loop: 1
> 
> This is a test message. Kindly ignore it please. Thanks!

[...]
 
> close test bug.

[...]

The second message is the ack from the control bot, which is the only
way you'd know whether or not this bug had been closed, marked
wontfix, reopened, unarchived, etc.

> Processing commands for control@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com:
> 
> > tag 302 wontfix
> bug#302: compilation problems on mac os x
> There were no tags set.
> Tags added: wontfix

All of these can be easily excluded using procmail or similar by
filtering out messages with X-Emacs-Pr-Message: closed and
X-Emacs-Pr-Message: transcript respectively.[1]

However, in my experience, they're all information that people
involved in tracking bugs really want to know about, which is why
they're sent out by default, and why I suggest keeping them on the
same mailing list as the other messages.


Don Armstrong

1: FE:
:0:
* ^X-Emacs-Pr-Message: (transcript|closed)
/dev/null
-- 
"There's no problem so large it can't be solved by killing the user
off, deleting their files, closing their account and reporting their
REAL earnings to the IRS."
 -- The B.O.F.H..

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    > Here are some examples of the sort of message which the bug tracker
    > is sending to emacs-devel or bug-gnu-emacs. I think it should be
    > fixed to stop sending these messages to those lists.

    The first corresponds to the bug actually being closed; it isn't a
    canned mail, but the concatenation of the original report,

I thought of it as canned because the text seems to be pretty
much the same every time.  Thanks for the correction.

The point is, please don't send those messages to bug-gnu-emacs.

    The second message is the ack from the control bot, which is the only
    way you'd know whether or not this bug had been closed, marked
    wontfix, reopened, unarchived, etc.

There is no reason to tell everyone on bug-gnu-emacs how this bug has
been marked.  Please don't send those messages to bug-gnu-emacs.

    However, in my experience, they're all information that people
    involved in tracking bugs really want to know about,

Most of the readers of bug-gnu-emacs are not involved in tracking bugs
this way.  Those that are involved can easily put themselves on the
list to receive those messages.

    All of these can be easily excluded using procmail or similar by
    filtering out messages with X-Emacs-Pr-Message: closed and
    X-Emacs-Pr-Message: transcript respectively.[1]

I am sure that is true, but it makes no sense to make a lot of people
go to this trouble.  Sending this mail to bug-gnu-emacs is a bad
default.

Please send it to some other list instead.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Sat, 31 May 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
> I am sure that is true, but it makes no sense to make a lot of
> people go to this trouble. Sending this mail to bug-gnu-emacs is a
> bad default.

It's a good default, but it may be improper for your project.

Whoever is responsible for the mailing lists on gnu.org needs to
create a new mailing list then, and install procmail or similar to
filter these messages to the other list. [If the latter part is too
difficult, I can implement it on my end, but I still need someone to
create that list.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you. If you don't
bet, you can't win.
 -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p240

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Stefan Monnier]

> Most of the readers of bug-gnu-emacs are not involved in tracking bugs
> this way.

Aren't they?  If so, shouldn't they be?


        Stefan

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Jason Rumney]

Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
>   
>> I am sure that is true, but it makes no sense to make a lot of
>> people go to this trouble. Sending this mail to bug-gnu-emacs is a
>> bad default.
>>     
>
> It's a good default, but it may be improper for your project.
>   

The wording of the done messages makes it look like the message is 
intended only for the developer who closed it.
Can we change the wording? It should be just the body of the done mail, 
the developer will indicate in there that they have dealt with the 
report, so it shouldn't be necessary to add extra text. And the original 
report can be looked up if someone following the thread does not 
remember what it was about.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    Whoever is responsible for the mailing lists on gnu.org needs to
    create a new mailing list then, and install procmail or similar to
    filter these messages to the other list. [If the latter part is too
    difficult, I can implement it on my end, but I still need someone to
    create that list.]

People with admin access should be able to create a new
list thru savannah.

How about emacs-bug-tracker@gnu.org?

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    > Most of the readers of bug-gnu-emacs are not involved in tracking bugs
    > this way.

    Aren't they?  If so, shouldn't they be?

Lots of people read that list, and only a few of them can make
changes in the source code.  Everyone else has no reason
to be concerned with bug tracker messages.

But even most of those people have no reason to be interested in the
bug tracker messages for any particular bug.  Usually only the person
who reported it and the person who fixes it are interested in the bug
tracker status.

I presume the bug tracker will send the messages separately to the
O.P.  And the person who fixes it and closes the bug item knows he did
so.

Other people will use the bug tracker to search for unfixed bugs, etc.
But they won't do that by looking at these messages.  They will
use another interface

So there is no need to send these messages to bug-gnu-emacs.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008, Jason Rumney wrote:
> The wording of the done messages makes it look like the message is
> intended only for the developer who closed it. Can we change the
> wording? It should be just the body of the done mail, the developer
> will indicate in there that they have dealt with the report, so it
> shouldn't be necessary to add extra text. And the original report
> can be looked up if someone following the thread does not remember
> what it was about.

Currently that same message is sent to the person who closed the bug
and any other interested parties, which is why it has that wording. [A
slightly different version is sent to the submitter of a bug.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it.
 -- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Richard M Stallman writes:

 > But even most of those people have no reason to be interested in the
 > bug tracker messages for any particular bug.  Usually only the person
 > who reported it and the person who fixes it are interested in the bug
 > tracker status.

That turns out not to be true.  (1) Maintainers are always interested
in the status of all bugs.  There is a difference between committing a
patch and closing the bug.  (2) People who are not really paying
attention to thread because they have a workaround will occasionally
wake up and say "don't close that, you didn't fix/broke my use case."
(3) In an active project there will be a large and growing gap between
total bugs and open bugs.  Seeing the flow of activity allows people
in general to see that work is being done at a reasonable rate,
despite this steady accumulation of open issues.

These cases notwithstanding, I agree that it's a bad idea for
bug-gnu-emacs because Emacs is unlikely to change to a tracker-centric
workflow soon, but it's not as obviously a bad idea as your sweeping
statements would have it.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    Currently that same message is sent to the person who closed the bug
    and any other interested parties, which is why it has that wording.

If you automatically always remove bug-gnu-emacs from the list of
interested parties, and add the new list (emacs-bug-tracker, perhaps),
that should do what is needed.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Mon, 02 Jun 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     Currently that same message is sent to the person who closed the bug
>     and any other interested parties, which is why it has that wording.
> 
> If you automatically always remove bug-gnu-emacs from the list of
> interested parties, and add the new list (emacs-bug-tracker, perhaps),
> that should do what is needed.

The way to do this is really with procmail on the receiving side
instead of special casing this in Debbugs. Regardless, it's still
blocking on someone creating the list and/or configuring procmail
rules.


Don Armstrong

-- 
I'd never hurt another living thing.
But if I did...
It would be you.
 -- Chris Bishop  http://www.chrisbishop.com/her/archives/her69.html

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    That turns out not to be true.  (1) Maintainers are always interested
    in the status of all bugs.

That is two people.  They can check this status thru the web interface
when they wish, or subscribe to the new mailing list.

      (2) People who are not really paying
    attention to thread because they have a workaround will occasionally
    wake up and say "don't close that, you didn't fix/broke my use case."

They could just as easily do this when they see someone say he
installed a fix.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Mon, 02 Jun 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
> They could just as easily do this when they see someone say he
> installed a fix.

The message installing the fix is often the -done message, which is
one of the messages you wanted filtered out.


Don Armstrong

-- 
"It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead
bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this
subject?"
 -- Robert Fisk

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Stefan Monnier]

> People with admin access should be able to create a new
> list thru savannah.

> How about emacs-bug-tracker@gnu.org?

Done.  I don't think we can do any procmail-style filtering there.
So Don, could you try and do it on your end?


        Stefan

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    The message installing the fix is often the -done message, which is
    one of the messages you wanted filtered out.

The messages I showed you seem to be automatically generated.
Are we really talking about the same messages?

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Richard M Stallman]

    The way to do this is really with procmail on the receiving side

What is "the receiving side"?  Does that mean the server that handles
bug-gnu-emacs?  Or does that mean all the machines of all the
subscribers on the list?

The latter is very bad because it makes hundreds of people do the work
repeatedly.

The former would be fine in theory, but in practice it is hard to do,
because only the FSF sysadmins could do it.  Doing this in the bug
tracker is much easier.

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     The message installing the fix is often the -done message, which is
>     one of the messages you wanted filtered out.
> 
> The messages I showed you seem to be automatically generated.

Only the first part of the -done message is automatically generated.
The part that interests you is at the bottom of them.

> Are we really talking about the same messages?

We are. You want to read my response which explains what those
messages are doing.


Don Armstrong

-- 
Vimes hated and despised the privileges of rank, but they had this to
be said for them: At least they meant that you could hate and despise
them in comfort.
 -- Terry Pratchett _The Fifth Elephant_ p111

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: Mail that shuld not be sent here

[Don Armstrong]

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     The way to do this is really with procmail on the receiving side
> 
> What is "the receiving side"?  Does that mean the server that handles
> bug-gnu-emacs?  Or does that mean all the machines of all the
> subscribers on the list?

Either; the former is right if the majority of people don't want them,
the latter is right if a small minority don't want them.
 
> The former would be fine in theory, but in practice it is hard to
> do, because only the FSF sysadmins could do it. Doing this in the
> bug tracker is much easier.

Which means that only I can do it. ;-)


Don Armstrong

-- 
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on
society.
 -- Mark Twain 

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu