Re: debbugs, and a FAQ, for Autotools

[Eric Blake]

On 02/13/2011 11:12 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> [ Cross post; Reply-To and Mail-Followup-To set.  Please followup to
>   the automake list only, to avoid excessive spammage.  Thank you.  ]
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> I've been advertising debbugs before, I think we should be a good
> example.  So, two proposals:
> 
> 1) Autoconf and Libtool should also use debbugs.
> 
> bug-automake has switched a few months ago, and I find it helpful to
> avoid losing reports.  Given that we never have enough time on our
> hands, it becomes more important to not lose track.
> 
> See http://debbugs.gnu.org/ and linked pages for details.

Seems like it might be reasonable for autoconf.  However, my biggest
concern is that right now, I filter both autoconf and automake messages
into the same mail folder, but debbugs anonymizes which list a bug is
being reported against (that is, the To: is rewritten as
address@hidden, so there is no longer any mention of 'automake' in
any of the normal mail headers).  While I could probably force filtering
to take place on X-Debbugs-Original-To:, that still doesn't solve the
problem of no visual indication on which list a bug is reported against.

Any ideas on how to resolve that issue?

-- 
Eric Blake   address@hidden    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature