* Nathan Wagner (nw...@hydaspes.if.org) wrote:
> I think I have suggested that there be a way to generate a bug id via
> email.  Presumably someone could just copy that email address to make a
> not-tracked discussion get a bug id.  If the system archived all the
> lists (not hard) it would be possible to pull the other emails from the
> thread into the bug (also not hard).  As for marking as 'not-a-bug'
> this can easily be done via whatever mechanism might be used.
> Something along the lines of:
> Bug Status: not a bug

If we're providing control messages through email (which I absolutely
believe needs to be supported), I'd strongly prefer that they be easy to
write.  The above isn't.

A good set of commands to support can be seen here:


The way debbugs currently works, which I like, is that you email
nnnn-d...@bugs.debian.org (NNNN being the bug #) and that automatically
closes the bug and that email is sent to the bug reporter.  Generally,
this will be in a reply to an email which came from, or at least CC'd,
n...@bugs.debian.org, so changing the address to go to -done is quite

An example would go something like:

Initial email:

From: 1...@bugs.postgresql.org
PG should do X

Reply email:

From: sfr...@snowman.net
To: 1234-d...@bugs.postgresql.org, cont...@bugs.postgresql.org

tag 1234 wontfix

Blah, blah, this is why we don't consider this a bug

Currently with debbugs (afaik, I can double-check with Don though), to
actually add tags you have to email control@, which will read and
process commands up until it finds a "thanks" or similar end-command.
Since the email is going to control@, you have to specify which bug
you're adding the tag to.

Here's an example of how the system is used:


Using control@, etc, avoids having to figure out if a given email sent
to n...@bugs.postgresq.org has commands in it or not (all emails to
control@ are assumed to have commands).



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to