From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Choice of bug tracker Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:53:26 +0000 Message-ID: <87r0njtrdl.fsf@localhost> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <831qfrptiq.fsf@gnu.org> <57429221-d9be-5791-e975-b3539905e2f6@gutov.dev> <83a5udlj47.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5udk1co.fsf@posteo.net> <835y51kslv.fsf@gnu.org> <7a82c524-1aa1-e755-e377-673ebb107a44@gutov.dev> <83r0nok8s4.fsf@gnu.org> <83ledwk4xi.fsf@gnu.org> <76ecf629-a41a-f6e4-f661-2ef926326d6c@gutov.dev> <83zg2cias7.fsf@gnu.org> <83pm37ie54.fsf@gnu.org> <831qfmhyx3.fsf@gnu.org> <87pm36kqlg.fsf@posteo.net> <87il8yuk6q.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ttsfts92.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32270"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: brickviking Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 31 12:53:25 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qbfIj-000899-6v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:53:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbfIN-00081R-AV; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:53:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbfIH-0007yu-85 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:52:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbfIE-0005en-OY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:52:57 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE88C240104 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:52:52 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693479172; bh=YwUyQLMoy1YPyGzIrUcEzQZvdKTT7tDGvr8TppsmOas=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=oITab/Ki6V2tFNUlAnisXR8Xwpd3AlLRv6IS7UrKYZ+bLoJXVvqtqafBMX9yZdLQZ a9HXA/wa2HtVjKRe5MloyNP02qNT14Vnpqhjuexksq3Nj2XR/2+r/I6Loz/C8jOwCm 26veycT8EqHU4qMPqsOYBEZN8ZgPHtpnuasyNzeO8IULoNLzXEG4mFJ7nEFhl5Fqqs KkdF2rHNq3/0Kc/jzj2h3qgG+QmGicikncS4TpYVcOitW+P+AIN3OOX6jH1M8n8vIS GbLQ0NiLJBCPWwc3xLulBhVnwuqeO7UVhyXEAXWTQ3Rfwsys2MZlNZNWy4W1HowFhX zv/OLlx8bAmBA== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Rbyg812Vyz9rxL; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:52:51 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309620 Archived-At: brickviking writes: >> > I think so. I hope we will also consider the capacity for separate >> > threads of discussion within an individual bug report a feature. >> >> But isn't it discouraged in debbugs? >> ... > What if there was a hypothetical bug report that actually had a multiple > number of things to address, but was only being reported under the original > "bug" that the user reported on? That'd still be a good reason to be able > to discuss #bugnum, #bugnum-feature1, #bugnum-feature2 and so on. I'm > assuming that this is what debbugs is "discouraging"? Yup. It feels "illegal" to open side discussions out of debbugs email threads. Though, on the second thought, nothing should stop users from branching off the thread into emacs-devel while dropping debbugs address. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at