LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:43:44 +0200
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Heiko Oberdiek <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (63 lines)

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:06:18AM +0000, Mittelbach, Frank wrote:

> I'm sorry for the trouble with the gnats system it is unfortunately not
> the best possible interface. You actually managed to reach the bug
> database each time, what you didn't manage was to reach it in a way that
> your mail shows up on the web.

And that's the only think I can see. Because nothing was shown,
my conclusion was rather that the spam filter has sorted the
mails to /dev/null.

> Here are the rules (as far as I remember them - if mistaken, I'm sure
> Rainer will correct me)


> To answer a bug entry:
>  - you send mail to [log in to unmask]
>   - to avoid generating a new bug entry this way you need to use a subject
>     line that contains <category>/<number> at the beginning (if think
>     stuff like Re: etc is possible
>   - you can have additional text in the subject and it doesn't have to
>     match the original bug synopsis
>   - if you do the above the entry will end up in the database but it will
>     not show up on the web and it will be distributed internally but not
>     back to the original poster (that's the way gants works)

It would be nice, if the gnats system could send a confirmation
that the entry has at least entered the database.

>   - if you want it to appear on the web you need to explicitly include the
>     original poster on CC or To:

That's the point I have missed. But I have found a successful
counter example: babel/3543. Here my reply ended up in the web
despite having me in the CC or To field. The CC field
was empty and the To field contained latex-bugs and latex-team.

> And that actually is the catch: with so much misuse and email adress
> harvesting the email addresses are no longer shown and so there isn't
> really any way for you to do that

Except I know the originator and its possible addresses.
In this case I would have known.
  Otherwise could latex-team as address be used to show it on
the web?

> Not sure what the best way is, perhaps in a case like this, open a new bug
> report and crossref though that isn't really a good solution either. What
> I can do is to take your reply and add it again with cc to the originator
> s othat he/she gets it and it shows on the web (not from here but tonight)


Yours sincerely