Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 16:24:59 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: PR mail (was: Re: NFS ftruncate patch for review) Message-ID: <20030719161449.O25754@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20030719033531.GA79812@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> References: <20030718064120.GA72366@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20030719033531.GA79812@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Tim Robbins wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 05:38:12PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > > BTW, what stopped PRs being mailed to the "normal" lists? freebsd-bugs is > > normal I think. > > The PRs are still getting mailed to freebsd-bugs. The reason you didn't see my > patch when I replied to the PR is because Kris assigned the PR to me. The I still feel I'm missing many of them. I'll do a more scientific survey. > reason followups go to the freebsd-bugs list is because, by default, the > Responsible: field in the PR is set to freebsd-bugs. It would be better if > Gnats would always Cc the bugs list. I've got the feeling that the default is sometimes (and more often than it used to be) freebsd-list-that-I'm-not-on. Ports PRs always went to somewhere that I didn't see. I rather liked this. Gnats does too good a job of sending all the administrivial mail to freebsd-bugs, as shown by Kris recently generating more PR mail than all commits :-). Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030719161449.O25754>