I disagree with Mike. Seeing the (?:Not )OK messages *also* in p5p is
good. Having to go the place X to separately see how a new release is
doing is bothersome. If somebody wants not to see the OK/Not OK
messages, I can personally advise them in the black art of procmail.
The OKs can be generated bug ids (and immediately closed), but I think
that's not necessary. If someone else with an "identical" system gets
different results, let them submit a separate Not OK.
(In my message quoted above "original ones" means true OKs)
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).
Use the headers, Luke^WRichard.
(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'?
I think both an "OK" would be ok.
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen