Re: bugs and bug tracking
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bugs and bug tracking |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24977.1444230298@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bugs and bug tracking (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: bugs and bug tracking
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > If I understand that correct, it completely breaks the current workflow of > "reply-all"? When I need to comment on a bug, isntead of hitting reply-all, > i should send it to the @bugs address? Or are you saying in those cases you > still hit reply-all but just edit the actual address? > (FWIW, I think editing the actual address is nowhere near as easy as just > adding a Status: <whatever> to the message itself. It's likely easier to > deal with on the *server* side, but it's definitely not easier for the > user. Especially if you're in a MUA that doesn't let you easily edit a mail > address (hello gmail! which is quite a few of our users..) FWIW, I agree that encoding this sort of thing in the email address seems like a pretty bad idea, because other people might reply-all to the modified address. Consider this flow: bug submittedinsufficiently-thought-through reply to NNNN-done with "not a bug"submitter replies (with cc to NNNN-done) withmore detailsreply: oh, you're right, so we should reopen it At least half, if not all, of the subsequent traffic in the thread is going to get cc'd to NNNN-done, thus repeatedly causing the bug to get "closed" prematurely. If you want such an API, I won't stop you from using it, but I will not use it myself. Please put in message-body commands as well. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: