Hi Sunhail, > Josselin Poiret writes: > >> One thing I would like to get rid of though is debbugs. It causes a >> lot of pain for everyone, eg. when sending patchsets, it completely >> breaks modern email because it insists on rewriting DMARC-protected >> headers, thus needing to also rewrite "From:" to avoid DMARC errors. > > Thank you for sharing (what seems to be) a technical limitation of > Debbugs. Could you please explain what the consequences of the above > are? Specifically, how does the rewriting of above headers affect the > contributors' workflow? Every reply to one of your mails ends up creating a new thread in my mail client, because the In-Reply-To chain ends up being broken. >> b4/lei is a nice example (we already have yhetil.org as a back-end, >> but maybe a more blessed one would be better) of a tool that lets you >> completely automate applying a patchset to a branch. >> >> patchwork is a nice tool to gather up and track patchsets, with status >> indicators like "under review", "accepted", etc. Chris already >> deploys one as part of QA, more integration with it would be nice. > > It seems (based on above) that "patchwork" can co-exist with debbugs. > Is that also the case with b4/lei? Specifically, are the > users/reviewers able to benefit from using the above tools at present? > Or are there some reasons (over and above their lack of familiarity with > the above tools) that would prevent them from doing so? They both can co-exist with debbugs, and for now the patchwork instance of QA is not usable for status tracking (because it is not meant to be used as such for now). One can already use both of them, but using both supercedes debbugs, and gets rid of its limitations. I've been using b4/lei with the yhetil public-inbox instance, with piem.el as an interface, and it's really useful. With a properly configured b4, one could simply run `b4 shazam some-msg-id` and it would automatically apply the corresponding patchset. And before you ask why I'm so intent on getting rid of Debbugs, I believe that mailing lists should be just that, mailing lists. Anything that tries to rewrite incoming mail is asking for trouble nowadays. Best, -- Josselin Poiret