On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:11:36 +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > tags 293714 + wontfix > thanks
I disagree on this wontfix tagging (speaking as another maintainer :)). Reasons follow. > Taken from the man-page: "bts - developers=E2=80=99 command line interfac= > e to the BTS". Well, the manpage is not a specification, we should feel free to change it. Also, I don't think adding optional support for using a MUA would change the command line intrinsic nature of bts. > This utility is used for manipulating bugs in the Debian BTS by command > line. I don't see any use here to spawn a MUA. If one wants to use a > MUA, then the whole mail can be written in your MUA. bts is handful to be used on a command line, that's out of discussion. Adding an option to edit the mail composed by bts before sending won't change the current way of using bts, unless the user explicitly ask for it. Regarding the latter point of creating the mail from scratch, it is not true that it would be the same. I would like to use facilities and knowledge of bts (for example on the bugs.d.o command syntax and email address conventions) and then, after bts prepared for me a mail template, manually review the mail, perhaps adding bits, and finally send it with my mua. Again: I'm not proposing to have this extra step as a default, but I don't see how it can harm in any way the current nature and usefulness of bts. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
