On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:03:31PM +0100, Dave Walker wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not convinced it needs changing.  [security] is a pretty logical topic
> tag, and rolls off the keyboard quite easily.
> So the real issue is filtering on headers.  Most mail providers do provide
> this, and certainly MUA.. however gmail does make it a bit harder.
> Mailman wont see all arbitrary "[strings]", but the ones that are added
> allows the user to subscript specifically to them.  [security] is one such
> tag, which means that OSSP interested parties could subscribe
> *specifically* to that tag (and probably [all] for good measure).
> However, this does mean that these subscribers have little chance of seeing
> any other mail.  What would be better would be to add labels (gmail
> terminology) specifically to [security] threads.
> Mailman does add an X- field such as:
> "X-Topics: foo Security bar"

Well you learn something everyday ... today it just started early ;)

I had a look at
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openstack-dev which will
list the topics setup and it's far from exhustive, for example '[all]' isn't
there :(

I don't want to start a flood of requests to the Infrastructure team but we
might want to expand the list a little.

Personally I'd like to see all and stable added.
We can avoid adding election as a topic if the election officials use
'[all][election]' in the subject line[1][2]

It's probably beneficial for the PTL to subscribe to cross-project.

Yours Tony.
[1] Which, speaking only for myself, I'm happy to do
[2] Assuming All is added as a topic

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to