If we pass the OK's on without bugids, do you not want the replies that may
be generated to be tracked, when someone says, "Ah no it doesn't, not on my
Stuff below from previous mail...
Jarkko Hietaniemi <email@example.com> wrote
In summary: real bug reports (either Not OKs or 'manual' ones)
should be filtered so that only the bug id-stamped ones get
through to p5p, the OKs should get silently stamped and
only the original ones should get through to p5p?
I'd personally prefer that *none* of the OK: messages were forwarded to
p5p. It would be much more useful to just have them filed somewhere.
Either perlbug is not letting OK ("make ok") messages through to p5p
at all (baaaad) or there seems to be a long time lag in perlbug
There is a big lag on mail that goes to perlbug, no idea where it comes
from, though I'd guess at a timely cronjob that processes any mailing list
stuff, (direct mail goes through quite quickly).
(baaaad): I've sent several OK messages for 5.005_58 (just out) but I
have seen none in p5p so far.
Yup, as above. They are all stored in the db.
P.S. Do you archive OK/Not OK messages somewhere?
Yup, currently I've just put them in the database, and closed them. They
could probably do with another category 'OK', or perhaps go under 'notabug'?
"Ciao" - (shorter than 'Aufwiedersehen' :-)