I do keep track of R's bug reports by RSS (Atom actually), but it's a bit more complicated than just copying the `feed' link after following the Show open bugs new-to-old link. If you use that feed, you will get the earliest 100 entries, starting Jan 28, 2000. I have had good luck monitoring the most recent bug reports using the following feed link (query):
https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/buglist.cgi?chfieldfrom=-4w&chfieldto=Now&query_format=advanced&title=Bug%20List&ctype=atom This query gives you the all the changes in the last four weeks (chfieldfrom=-4w). Of course, you can customize your query and the corresponding RSS/Atom feed using the Bugzilla advanced search feature here: https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/query.cgi?format=advanced Cheers and Happy Holidays, Matt On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 11:32 -0500, Simon Urbanek wrote: > On Dec 24, 2010, at 12:22 AM, Marc Schwartz wrote: > > > On Dec 23, 2010, at 8:24 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote: > > > >> On Dec 23, 2010, at 7:44 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote: > >> > >>> This message contains a good question: > >>> > >>> Is there any reason why the bug reports are no longer mailed to R-devel? > >> > >> The way Bugzilla works is that all parties involved in a bug get e-mails - > >> but then they get all of them including all updates of the status, replies > >> etc. One way to get involved is to be the assignee for a bug and most bugs > >> have R-core as the assignee so that's where it goes. Although we could add > >> R-devel on the CC list it would mean that *every* change to a bug will > >> result in a message and I suspect R-devel subscribers would not be quite > >> happy about that. > >> > >> I don't know of any provision that would make it possible to broadcast the > >> initial report only. Moreover, doing so on R-devel would be somewhat > >> problematic, because people might reply to all and thus some > >> correspondence would still land on R-devel whereas replies via website > >> would not - and that could lead to a serious confusion. > >> > >> > >>> I'd appreciate to get a notice what is going on in the bug repository > >>> without having to look on those web pages. > >>> > >> > >> I could add you to the CC list of any (or all) components - that's one way > >> (it could be interesting to see how it works traffic-wise). Another would > >> be to have a dedicated list for the bug traffic (R-bugs is not a list). > >> Or, as I said, we could put R-devel on the CC list for all components. I > >> wouldn't mind doing so, but I'm not sure what the R-devel readership would > >> say... Comments are welcome. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Simon > > > > I don't know what the volume of traffic would be from Bugzilla these days > > versus what it used to be from Jitterbug. > > > > One of the issues with Jitterbug and the cc'ing of bug reports and comments > > to R-devel, is that the e-mails would frequently come from the participants > > in the bug report who were not subscribers to R-devel. That required that > > the R-devel moderators manually approve those e-mails, which added > > overhead. In fact, since moving to Bugzilla, the volume of manual approvals > > on R-devel has declined notably since those e-mails are no longer mirrored. > > > > That is an interesting point and confirms my feeling that the dual-mode > approach has serious implications. > > > > There is not an easy way to interact with Bugzilla via e-mail as there was > > with Jitterbug. The last time that I looked into this during the > > transition, it would require e-mails with a very specific formatting and > > name-value pair style entries in the message body, which could then be > > parsed by Bugzilla for inclusion into the underlying database. So one could > > not just reply to a Bugzilla bug report or comment with a free form e-mail > > as could be done with Jitterbug. > > > > We work around that for R-bugs by injecting the comments directly into the > bugzilla database. The rationale is that no extra e-mail notification is > needed since the e-mail (hopefully) went to all parties involved so bypassing > bugzilla for the update is fine. So far it seemed to work just fine. (The > only additional service I was thinking of would be to allow the change of > status by e-mail - using some define keyword/phrase - so you don't have to go > back to the website to close a bug). > > > > If an e-mail list mirror is desired, I would vote for a separate READ-ONLY > > list that folks could subscribe to and/or perhaps have an RSS feed that > > could be followed for updates. Making the list read-only would obviate > > situations where somebody replied to a bug report and/or comment via > > e-mail, where that reply would of course not make it into the Bugzilla repo > > thread, resulting in a loss of information. > > > > Maybe the reply-to could be R-bugs which would solve the reply issue, but the > original issue of non-registered users replying would still remain with even > bigger consequences (the replies would not even go to bugzilla). However, I > could generate bounce e-mails for those, notifying the sender that he is not > registered and thus his post will be discarded - not sure if that helps, > though (and it may lead to issues with spammers getting replies). Also it > would increase the traffic on R-bugs which would make manual screening (which > is what I do at the moment for people that try to e-mail new reports to > R-bugs) almost impossible. > > > > With Bugzilla, the results of search queries generate an RSS feed link at > > the bottom of the query results page (see the "Feed" link), which can be > > subscribed to using one's favorite RSS reader. That would be one way of > > keeping track of new/open bug reports. > > > > That sounds like a good idea to me - especially since it's there already ;). > > > > One could, if desired, create custom queries in Bugzilla using the Advanced > > Search functionality and then use the resultant RSS feed link to keep track > > of updates to the particular query result set. > > > > Also, I don't know what the typical response time has been on Bugzilla once > > a bug report is filed. Perhaps something could be noted there so that bug > > reporters might have some expectation that a comment/reply might be > > forthcoming within X days of filing. After that time frame, some > > recommended form of follow up communication could take place as a > > tickler/reminder of sorts. > > > > This is happening, but only to the assignees, so currently on R-core or to > individuals. > > Thanks for the comments, > Simon > > > > That's my $0.02. > > > > Regards, > > > > Marc Schwartz > > > >> > >> > >>> > >>> On 21.12.2010 18:50, Ken Williams wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> A few days ago I filed a bug report on the unzip() function: > >>>> > >>>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=14462 > >>>> > >>>> I haven't gotten any comments yet, so I thought I'd ask for comments > >>>> here. I also see on the description of R-devel that the list "also > >>>> receives all (filtered, i.e. non-spam!) bug reports from R-bugs", but > >>>> I don't see it here. > >>>> > >>>> Eventually I would like to help unzip() gain large-file support, such > >>>> as is offered by http://info-zip.org/UnZip.html version 6.0. A > >>>> corresponding zip() function would be nice too. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks. > >>>> > >>>> -Ken > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel -- Matthew S. Shotwell Graduate Student Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Medical University of South Carolina ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
