On Wednesday 01 November 2006 08:10, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > I'm afraid I didn't get this notice, nor did the bug do. I'm only
> > maintaining gnome-applets via the PTS subscription, so if you mailed
> > the Maintainer: directly, this isn't enough. I think mailing the
> > @packages.debian.org would have reached me, but I'm not 100% sure
> > anymore now.
>
> The @p.d.o address is the one getting the first mail ("intent to NMU")
> and the second one, 7 days later ("announce of the upcoming NMU"). The
> mail is sent with "X-PTS-Approved" headers.
>
> This is not the first time that I see that, indeed, mails sent to
> <package>@p.d.o do not easily reach package maintainers. There is
> still something that I'm probably missing, here.Hi, as I understand it, there is a subtle difference between the [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note the additional .qa-part!) mail aliases. The @p.d.o alias just forwards the mail to the address listed as "Maintainer:" in debian/control. You don't need the "X-PTS-Approved:" header for that alias, it'll just forward anything received for the alias. Note, however, that this does *not* include people subscribed to the package via the PTS, nor anyone listed as "Uploader:". The @p.qa.d.o alias, on the other hand, does seem to require the "X-PTS-Approved:" header, otherwise the mail will not be forwarded. If the mail gets forwarded, it'll include the people who are subscribed to the package's PTS interface with the "default" keyword. Regards, Tobias -- Tobias Toedter | "I never forget a face, but in your case I'll be glad Hamburg, Germany | to make an exception." -- Groucho Marx
pgpPTPazRy7gj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
