Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Goswin von Brederlow writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
The reason why there is a problem with an http submission interface is
that suddenly every idiot will think oh I must write
Fernando Lemos fernando...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Patrick Strasser
patrick.stras...@tugraz.at wrote:
[...]
Why not use some simple non-HTTP-protocol on port 80?
That tends to break transparent proxying. If port 80 is the only one
you have open, chances are
Goswin von Brederlow writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
The reason why there is a problem with an http submission interface is
that suddenly every idiot will think oh I must write a cool ui for
this.
But with the tunneling suggested
There are plenty of cgi-bin scripts that send email via a web interface. I'm
sure that it wouldn't be difficult to install one of them on a web server for
the purpose of forwarding Debian bug reports. So really anyone who is good at
running web servers can setup a HTTP submission method if
Russell Coker writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
Would someone who wants to write a HTTP client bug reporting tool really be
prevented because they have to setup their own server too?
That would just result in their mail server being blocked by DSA or
owner@bugs.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
schrieb Ian Jackson am 2011-05-25 13:46:
I wrote:
Brian May writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
[ explanation of how reportbug is broken right now ]
We could solve this if we can avoid the slippery slope problem.
Or to put it another way, I would have no objection to an http
submission
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Patrick Strasser
patrick.stras...@tugraz.at wrote:
[...]
Why not use some simple non-HTTP-protocol on port 80?
That tends to break transparent proxying. If port 80 is the only one
you have open, chances are you're behind a transparent proxy as well.
Regards,
Brian May writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
[ explanation of how reportbug is broken right now ]
We could solve this if we can avoid the slippery slope problem.
Or to put it another way, I would have no objection to an http
submission interface to the BTS, provided that everyone
I wrote:
Brian May writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
[ explanation of how reportbug is broken right now ]
We could solve this if we can avoid the slippery slope problem.
Or to put it another way, I would have no objection to an http
submission interface to the BTS, provided
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Brian May writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
[ explanation of how reportbug is broken right now ]
We could solve this if we can avoid the slippery slope problem.
Or to put it another way, I would have no objection to an http
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au writes:
Some don't even have Internet access.
So, how do you propose reportbug should handle those? Send a fax?
Seriously, what problem do you have that isn't solved by
reportbug --offline --output=foo
?
Bjørn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Goswin von Brederlow writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
So everyone is allowed to write a frontend to report bugs via smtp. But
only reportbug is allowed to use http? That seems a bit stupid.
No-one _wants_ to write a frontend to report bugs via smtp, and doing
so as a simple serverless web
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Goswin von Brederlow writes (Re: Getting good bug reports):
So everyone is allowed to write a frontend to report bugs via smtp. But
only reportbug is allowed to use http? That seems a bit stupid.
No-one _wants_ to write a frontend to report
On 25 May 2011 05:25, Patrick Strasser patrick.stras...@tugraz.at wrote:
Point 3). Still it's too hard for a real novice which would like to help
to get a bug report not at all out. The starting suggestion for this
thread was to add an HTTP based transport path to get around the MTA
thing. In
14 matches
Mail list logo
