From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Don't report new bugs for Rmail??
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:15:45 -0500
Message-ID: <jwvfxixamx6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
References: <umyd7zsg0.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20090131104403.GQ4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> <uljsrzpsn.fsf@gnu.org>
	<f7ccd24b0901310328r2ea477f2u4ac3f9c53c59b5a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<uk58bzlom.fsf@gnu.org> <20090131211929.GT4175@volo.donarmstrong.com>
	<u1vujdtut.fsf@gnu.org> <20090131222401.GU4175@volo.donarmstrong.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1233595085 26421 80.91.229.12 (2 Feb 2009 17:18:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:18:05 +0000 (UTC)
To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 02 18:19:18 2009
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1LU2Rs-0005gF-I4
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:19:04 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45044 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LU2QZ-0002sF-QR
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:17:43 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LU2II-0003RV-2y
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:09:10 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LU2IG-0003Pv-7c
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:09:09 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43038 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LU2IG-0003Pl-16
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:09:08 -0500
Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:29603
	helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>) id 1LU2IF-0000Zk-OE
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:09:07 -0500
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AswEAD+3hknO+IQk/2dsb2JhbACBbsozhBQGgmw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,366,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="33208401"
Original-Received: from 206-248-132-36.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home)
	([206.248.132.36])
	by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2009 12:09:07 -0500
Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848)
	id 6202AB410B; Sun,  1 Feb 2009 16:15:45 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <20090131222401.GU4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> (Don Armstrong's
	message of "Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:24:01 -0800")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not
	recognized.
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108595
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/108595>

> As far as the BTS is concerned, it doesn't exist. Bugs are allowed to
> be assigned to packages which do not exist.

Indeed and we use that as labels by assigning bugs to emacs,<label>.
You mentioned "usertags" as another (better?) way to do the same, but
I don't know what that is.  Any URL?
 
>> Well, that request can easily be interpreted as meaning that bug
>> reports against Rmail are not welcome.  I think this is not what we
>> want to say.
> It is actually what is meant.  If a package doesn't exist, people
> shouldn't file bugs against it.  The problem here is that the package
> *should* apparently exist, and no one has bothered to communicate
> that fact.

I think the message should be changed to say that bugs should be
assigned to the `emacs' package instead.  I.e. we don't want to imply
that bugs shouldn't be reported, but just that they should be reported
elsewhere (to the "parent" package).


        Stefan