From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Don't report new bugs for Rmail?? Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 12:15:53 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20090131104403.GQ4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> <20090131211929.GT4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> <20090201040218.GZ4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1233487006 15196 80.91.229.12 (1 Feb 2009 11:16:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 11:16:46 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 01 12:18:00 2009 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 1LTaKt-0001KK-EL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:17:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55549 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LTaJa-0003by-HU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:16:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTaIw-0003WZ-8a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:15:58 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTaIt-0003W3-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:15:57 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53370 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LTaIt-0003Vv-0O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:15:55 -0500 Original-Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.189]:52076) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LTaIs-0005Bu-EU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:15:54 -0500 Original-Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c7so223783nfi.26 for ; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:15:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=2z0FcLLx/6qQo58tBuOM02eOj8iiiYUmhqoCsKpdxk8=; b=nVDcheo9gj1hdbWldO3fDPObdzSGfsrcCd31UuLkBcu4TFduv1kWMP3gv24L0dlYIH HXFZZbypDuVQap35/vg79oOwa0jgHuds7j2Engk/qq4/LLIURjTp2JGWa35H5myHQs1R 27DItAytiBQGMm35hAlWbuPi/xH5uOLYtrmJ4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ncpYMjGpD6GHSwDPKzBdbj/lp34PhjeFFYqOmoBEpd2irDvtNQ2ys/9guTKXigkYz1 2ON2v+1phmUuZBaq+ssSbSwkN4AtzRVlfAkh9/mhkVRJxkxxBjQW6BYCXFm3NCMDhgfg M/Mu1MNC3DfN3gzwv+nSmZXznbI0GdrARweFw= Original-Received: by 10.210.37.16 with SMTP id k16mr523226ebk.97.1233486953106; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:15:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20090201040218.GZ4175@volo.donarmstrong.com> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:108510 Archived-At: On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 05:02, Don Armstrong wrote: > I'd rather not waste time trying to work around problems and > misconceptions brought about by the use of invented non-standard > nomenclature to describe how debbugs operates. [In actual fact, I > probably won't spend the time dealing with such issues at all.] It is clear that what I'm describing as a "label" is just what you call a "package that has not been created". The fact they are initially arbitrary labels is highlighted by the fact that reassign N this-nonexistent-package works (with a warning), and then you can search for this-nonexistent-package. If packages were so first-order objects, it would be impossible to assign one to a nonexistent one. > No. You can search for bugs which have package "rmail". Yes. That's exactly what I was saying. But, until you create the package rmail, "rmail" is only a label (even if you and debbugs don't call it so). > There is no > such thing as a label in debbugs. The package a bug is assigned to has > nothing to do with whether the package is known to exist. Debbugs only > cares about what is in the package field of the bug when searching for > bugs. Which agrees 100% with what I said, except by nomenclature. Juanma