From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: followup to bug report not included in bug tracker; diverseautomatic Subject lines; ACK noise Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:36:58 -0700 Message-ID: <004901c8d3d6$2c1e6270$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> References: <001901c8d112$df848680$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com><20080618192134.GA20708@rzlab.ucr.edu><004301c8d3bd$e86238d0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com><87hcbmlly8.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1214077132 23280 80.91.229.12 (21 Jun 2008 19:38:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 19:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Don Armstrong' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" , "'Miles Bader'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 21 21:39:36 2008 Return-path: 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 1KA8vv-0001Q1-V6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:39:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41796 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KA8v7-00030F-2G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:38:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KA8uZ-0002pK-Of for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:38:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KA8uY-0002ol-Ae for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:38:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43397 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KA8uX-0002oc-T0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:38:09 -0400 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:43851) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KA8uR-0000qy-R5; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:38:04 -0400 Original-Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m5LJbn00011325; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 13:37:49 -0600 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m5LHINw8031316; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 13:37:48 -0600 Original-Received: from inet-141-146-46-1.oracle.com by acsmt351.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3695512941214077015; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:36:55 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/24.5.171.3) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:36:54 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcjT1NIDuk48odc7TIqgYetGOiSOdAAAHgkA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:99623 Archived-At: > >> The (35-character!!) prefix "bug#400: Acknowledgement > >> (23.0.60; " just obfuscates things for the user and makes > >> it difficult to group messages about > >> the same bug together in a mail client. > > > "bug#400: " doesn't seem too bad though. > > Agreed. Basically, each bug number gets its own mini > mailing-list, Why should that happen? Why have two threads for the same bug? Some people might reply to the original thread (sans label) and others might reply to the other thread (with label). Mess; nothing gained. I don't see why this is considered advantageous. It sounds like users sacrificing for the sake of tools. The tools should make life easier for the users, not the other way around. > and prepending the list name (unless it's already in the subject, > typically right after "Re:") is standard practice. > But maybe it should be "[bug#400] ". It's hard for me to believe that changing the subject line would be standard practice anywhere. Anyway, even if it is standard practice for you, it's not what I'm used to or what I prefer. I don't see the need for it or the advantage. The tools should be able to follow a thread without changing the Subject line.