[gentoo-dev] Re: stripping out the DO NOT REPLY from bugzie emails
Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:01:39 +0200: On 29-09-2007 02:29:21 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 09:23:21AM +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote: Andrew Gaffney [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: It seems that not everybody loves the new DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL header at the top of every bugzie email as much as robbat2 does. 1. if everybody hates it (full ack btw), why not remove it globally? Not everybody hates it, and it's there to dissuade users from replying to Bugzilla mail by hitting reply in the MUA. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181172 Isn't that tackled suffiently now by setting a bogus reply-to header? The problem is those replies may contain information of use in fixing the bug. If the mail gets null-spaced... Better to warn upfront that a reply via mail isn't going to have the intended results, AND bogus reply-to header it. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stripping out the DO NOT REPLY from bugzie emails
On 29-09-2007 14:11:54 +, Duncan wrote: Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:01:39 +0200: On 29-09-2007 02:29:21 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 09:23:21AM +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote: Andrew Gaffney [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: It seems that not everybody loves the new DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL header at the top of every bugzie email as much as robbat2 does. 1. if everybody hates it (full ack btw), why not remove it globally? Not everybody hates it, and it's there to dissuade users from replying to Bugzilla mail by hitting reply in the MUA. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181172 Isn't that tackled suffiently now by setting a bogus reply-to header? The problem is those replies may contain information of use in fixing the bug. If the mail gets null-spaced... I don't see your point. If you have a mailserver running on localhost that accepts mail for /dev/null (i.e. it thinks it is a valid email address) and discards it without notice, then that's your problem. Most of the time this is not the case and an immediate reject or a bounce message is the result. Better to warn upfront that a reply via mail isn't going to have the intended results, AND bogus reply-to header it. I agree warning is fine. However, I think there is a correlation between people hitting reply to bugzilla mails and people not reading/paying attention to such messages. I think the annoyance of having the message does not pay off against the technical limitation of not being able to reply any more, whereas the latter is very effective and the first probably not. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stripping out the DO NOT REPLY from bugzie emails
Fabian Groffen wrote: The problem is those replies may contain information of use in fixing the bug. If the mail gets null-spaced... I don't see your point. If you have a mailserver running on localhost that accepts mail for /dev/null (i.e. it thinks it is a valid email address) and discards it without notice, then that's your problem. Most of the time this is not the case and an immediate reject or a bounce message is the result. Right! The bogus reply-to should either be an invalid address, in which case the sender will realize right away that the mail did not go anywhere, or there could be an autoresponder that tells the sender to use bugzilla's web interface. Or... you could keep the return address as-is, but use procmail to not accept mail unless it is from the bugzilla system (otherwise, autorespond as above). Any of these would be preferable to the 3 extra lines at the top of every email now that are not only annoying, but only useful to initiate the few who would attempt to reply. I agree warning is fine. However, I think there is a correlation between people hitting reply to bugzilla mails and people not reading/paying attention to such messages. I think the annoyance of having the message does not pay off against the technical limitation of not being able to reply any more, whereas the latter is very effective and the first probably not. Agreed. There are several technical solutions that are far more effective and less annoying than the banner. -Joe -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
