Re: Will kopete be ported to kf5?

[Pali Rohár]

On Thursday 01 February 2018 21:06:05 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Pali, bugzilla email works for many developers and this is the first time that
> I heard issues with that. If it does not work with your email, it's possible
> to redirect the notifications to a mailing list (like this; it works for
> example for Okular).

Emails from bugzilla are sent but mangled, which are hard to view/filter
or process. I reported this bug and nobody want to fix it:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359603

> Also, you can periodically check queries on the website for updated/new bugs.

Yes, I have custom saved searches and occasionally do that.

> Given that contributors expect to use bugzilla, not looking at it is not doing
> a favor to the community.

Sorry, but I really do not have enough time to deal with buggy software
which makes my work even harder. And also I do not have time to hack my
MDA+MUA to start repairing "hard-to-process" kde bugzilla emails.

I got answer that I should ignore emails RFCs (e.g. RFC5322), but sorry
all my email software is written according RFC2822 or RFC5322. Therefore
I cannot easily ignore them.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.ro...@gmail.com

Re: Will kopete be ported to kf5?

[Luigi Toscano]

On Wednesday, 7 February 2018 09:43:27 CET Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Thursday 01 February 2018 21:06:05 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> > Pali, bugzilla email works for many developers and this is the first time
> > that I heard issues with that. If it does not work with your email, it's
> > possible to redirect the notifications to a mailing list (like this; it
> > works for example for Okular).
> 
> Emails from bugzilla are sent but mangled, which are hard to view/filter
> or process. I reported this bug and nobody want to fix it:
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359603

For reference, the change applied (the address of emails from bugzilla 
contains bugzilla_nore...@kde.org) are needed to avoid rejections from major 
email providers. It's bad and sad, but it's as it is.

> > Also, you can periodically check queries on the website for updated/new
> > bugs.
> Yes, I have custom saved searches and occasionally do that.
> 
> > Given that contributors expect to use bugzilla, not looking at it is not
> > doing a favor to the community.
> 
> Sorry, but I really do not have enough time to deal with buggy software
> which makes my work even harder. And also I do not have time to hack my
> MDA+MUA to start repairing "hard-to-process" kde bugzilla emails.

What exactly breaks your workflow? Bugzilla provides headers with all the 
information, if needed (and kmail shows some of them). You see the name of the 
person. I receive bugs from bugzilla too, either through emails or directly. 
How does the workflow is broken exactly ?

> 
> I got answer that I should ignore emails RFCs (e.g. RFC5322), but sorry
> all my email software is written according RFC2822 or RFC5322. Therefore
> I cannot easily ignore them.

That's not all the story and the problem is more complicated. Not implementing 
the change means rejected emails. Sad, I don't like it too, but I don't see 
how this specific change is impacting any bugzilla workflow heavily.

-- 
Luigi

Bugzilla emails (Was Re: Will kopete be ported to kf5?)

[Pali Rohár]

On Wednesday 07 February 2018 12:27:20 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 February 2018 09:43:27 CET Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 February 2018 21:06:05 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> > > Pali, bugzilla email works for many developers and this is the first time
> > > that I heard issues with that. If it does not work with your email, it's
> > > possible to redirect the notifications to a mailing list (like this; it
> > > works for example for Okular).
> > 
> > Emails from bugzilla are sent but mangled, which are hard to view/filter
> > or process. I reported this bug and nobody want to fix it:
> > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=359603
> 
> For reference, the change applied (the address of emails from bugzilla 
> contains bugzilla_nore...@kde.org) are needed to avoid rejections from major 
> email providers. It's bad and sad, but it's as it is.
> 
> > > Also, you can periodically check queries on the website for updated/new
> > > bugs.
> > Yes, I have custom saved searches and occasionally do that.
> > 
> > > Given that contributors expect to use bugzilla, not looking at it is not
> > > doing a favor to the community.
> > 
> > Sorry, but I really do not have enough time to deal with buggy software
> > which makes my work even harder. And also I do not have time to hack my
> > MDA+MUA to start repairing "hard-to-process" kde bugzilla emails.
> 
> What exactly breaks your workflow? Bugzilla provides headers with all the 
> information, if needed (and kmail shows some of them). You see the name of 
> the 
> person. I receive bugs from bugzilla too, either through emails or directly. 
> How does the workflow is broken exactly ?

I know that there is header X-Bugzilla-Who, but as I said I do not
process this header. I'm parsing From header for lot of other usage
(e.g. filtering by email or name, autocompletion of email address based
on name, searching for special emails, etc...) and bugzilla fully mess
it. E.g. when I was trying to send email to some Person who reported bug
to bugzilla, autocompletion found that person's email address is
bugzilla_nore...@kde.org just because I got email with header:
   From: Person 
Also I'm not able to find his bugzilla reports based on email address as
there is only in bugzilla_nore...@kde.org From header. I need to either
do it based on name (phrase) or by that X-Bugzilla-Who header (which I
do not process).

> > 
> > I got answer that I should ignore emails RFCs (e.g. RFC5322), but sorry
> > all my email software is written according RFC2822 or RFC5322. Therefore
> > I cannot easily ignore them.
> 
> That's not all the story and the problem is more complicated. Not 
> implementing 
> the change means rejected emails. Sad, I don't like it too, but I don't see 
> how this specific change is impacting any bugzilla workflow heavily.

It is really not my problem if somebody has an email provider with
nonsense dmarc p=reject. It breaks the way how emails are working and
also breaks lot of software written according to email standards. And
fact is that it does not stop spam, but rather regular email...

And just because of this I need to hack and change my other software? I
do not have time for it and also motivation, because it is working fine.
Problem is on sender.

You already said that it is bad, therefore I think you understand it.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.ro...@gmail.com