After an exchange with the author of one of the recent misfiled PRs, I think an additional word to the wise might be in order..
The PR was 4106, and the synopsis/subject was "Apache Bug# 3749". The message was sent to Marc and Cced to apbugs, and the author says he was careful to follow the directions exactly (including not munging the subject line). What I'm inferring happened is that Marc probably replied with an out-of-band message with that subject, but left the [instructions] block in the quoted text, so the PR author thought he could leave the subject alone and Cc apbugs. That may not be what happened, but it's still a possible source of confusion, so here's the note: When corresponding about a PR, *never* keep the [instruction] block (you know, the "[In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, ]" stuff) in the text of your message unless the subject line is still in GNATS-usable format. Either keep the subject line intact, or elide the [instructions]. This won't solve the problem, of course -- witness the number of 'why has Apache stolen my favourite site' lamers who couldn't read a recipe for hard-boiled eggs -- but maybe it will help.. -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/> Apache Group member <http://www.apache.org/> "Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/ASFD/>
