Control: reopen -1
Control: retitle -1 support Control: pseudo-headers in nnn-done@ mails
On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 21:49:01 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> The main reason why it's not supported is because of the effort required
> to handle nnn-done@ in scripts/process rather than a principled
> objectio
On Sat, 17 Sep 2022, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:07:55 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Yes, that's correct; the processing for nnn-done@ doesn't do Control:
> > processing.
>
> People often think that it does, don't notice that it doesn't and then
> bugs don't get updated properly. I
On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:07:55 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> Yes, that's correct; the processing for nnn-done@ doesn't do Control:
> processing.
People often think that it does, don't notice that it doesn't and then
bugs don't get updated properly. I have seen this a number of times.
Personally I t
On Mon, 2022-09-12 at 23:17 -0300, Joao Eriberto Mota Filho wrote:
> I noticed in several opportunities that any "Control: fixed" inside
> email
> messages won't work. See an example here[1]. I needed to send an
> extra command
> via bts ($ bts fixed 336959 spell/1.0-16) to work.
>
> [1] https://b
Package: bugs.debian.org
Severity: normal
Dear maintainers,
I noticed in several opportunities that any "Control: fixed" inside email
messages won't work. See an example here[1]. I needed to send an extra command
via bts ($ bts fixed 336959 spell/1.0-16) to work.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/3369
5 matches
Mail list logo
