Re: Processed: control message for bug #33200

[Noam Postavsky]

On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 at 08:27, Garreau, Alexandre <address@hidden> wrote:

> As I recently found mentions of `gnus-bug' (which seems to have become
> incomplete and partially obsolete (as I’ve been said gnus is no longer a
> standalone package but fully integrated in emacs),

Lars said it should be obsoleted a while back, so yeah, we should
probably get on that...

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2017-02/msg00266.html

> So first, dear GNU debbugs people, would it be currently possible for
> “gnus” bugs to be automatically tagged “emacs”?  would it be hard to
> hack debbugs to do so (so to deal with such “subpackages”)?  Or should
> “gnus” package be removed?

I think the "gnus" package should be removed. It was discussed a bit
on Bug#20670 (not otherwise related):

https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20670#17

> so mail sent too fast,

Yeah, I have in my .emacs.d an alternate function which just adds the
control commands to an email, so that the user can review before
sending. I will see about adding it to debbugs.el.

> and I ended the bug “owner” (I’m learning so I still don’t even
> know what does that mean ^^' (is this reversible without intending
> unintended meaning such as “I don’t want to help with this bug” (while
> I’d like to, but amn’t aware of how exactely)?)).

I don't think anybody really uses "owner" much, so it de facto hardly
means anything. You can reset the owner by sending

noowner 33200

to address@hidden (not sure if debbugs.el specifically
supports that command, see [1] for the full list).

[1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/server-control.html

> I only then discovered “reassign” (by looking at other bug reports and
> noticing such control messages by Lars, Gnus author (and maintainer?)):
> so I tried it, and it seem to worked, but afterward the bug didn’t
> arrive on bug-gnu-emacs (why? should mandatorily have it been “emacs”
> from the beginning so to get that behavior? should a followup to
> bug-gnu-emacs be made for it? I thought bug-gnu-emacs was an interface
> to emacs bts…),

I think if you send new measages to address@hidden they should
go to the bug-gnu-emacs list. Old messages are not resent I guess.

> and the bug then marked as “no longer found in 5.13”:
> why?  I didn’t intended that (though the patch I tried to make was made
> from last git emacs version).

I think the idea is that version refers to the old package, so if you
change packages the version number is no longer meaningful (e.g., you
should set it to 26.1, or whatever Emacs version you tested in). Which
is to say, this part of the software doesn't really take into account
bugs which are tagged for multiple packages.