On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 15:26 +0200, Bron Gondwana wrote: > > >Look for useqacontact. > > First, thanks for saving me a ton of time, Dan. useqacontact was > > set to "off", and I changed that so it's now on. > > I noticed that pretty much every component of the Cyrus IMAP product > > already had a QA Contact defined as > > cyrus-bugzi...@lists.andrew.cmu.edu, which would, as the address > > implies, be delivered to the cyrus-bugzilla list. > > The archives of this list show that some amount of mail was already > > being sent there, but if useqacontact does what it's documented to > > do, this list should now begin getting a lot more mail. > > Is everyone okay with just keeping things the way they are > > configured now, assuming that the mail is actually being sent out, > > or would you rather I change the QA contact to be > > cyrus-devel@lists.andrew.cmu.edu instead of > > cyrus-bugzi...@lists.andrew.cmu.edu? > I can't see why we can't sign up to cyrus-bugzilla if we want to see it!
There hasn't been any traffic on cyrus-bugzilla since January 2010 according to the archives - and that was two people asking troubleshooting questions. You have to go back to April 2007 to see bug traffic. <https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/private/cyrus-bugzilla/> Doesn't seem to me like it is working. > Is there any way to automatically set up the reply-to so that replies > come to cyrus-devel? That way we can choose if we want to see every bug > or only the discussion that bugs spark... -- Adam Tauno Williams <awill...@whitemice.org> LPIC-1, Novell CLA <http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com> OpenGroupware, Cyrus IMAPd, Postfix, OpenLDAP, Samba
