Re: telling the tracker *not* to create a bug ID?

[Eric Blake]

On 04/29/2010 04:10 PM, Glenn Morris wrote:

> Perhaps the FSF admins could make the bug-coreutils router rule more
> complex, so that messages satisfying some criterion you specify got
> passed through as is, rather than re-routed to address@hidden You'd
> have to ask them. Or maybe if you have an alias to bug-coreutils,
> using that address would bypass the router rule? I don't know. Again,
> seems like it might be complex and/or fragile.

This might work - Jim recently created coreutils-patches@ as an alias to
bug-coreutils@; but changing the former to be list-only while the latter
continues to route through address@hidden would have the desired end
result of an alias that sends mail to the same list but without spawning
a bug.

>> I have been posting patches to bug-coreutils, and it is
>> annoying to have to mark each as "done".  Recently I simply
>> posted to the non-bug- address, but that's ugly, too.
> 
> Why is it ugly - I thought you created the non-bug- address for just
> such purposes?

If I understand correctly, the coreutils@ list was created primarily for
discussion of development concepts, but not necessarily for patches.

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

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature