Processed: Uniform field for automated package maintenance email messages (was: Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails)

2008-05-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 479953 uniform field for automated package maintenance email messages Bug#479953: uniform control field for automated package maintenance emails Changed Bug title to `uniform field for automated package maintenance email messages' from `uniform

Re: Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-08 Thread Thijs Kinkhorst
On Thursday 8 May 2008 00:14, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > b. Every tool sending (machine generated) mail to Debian Developers >    should add a header of the form > >      X-Debian: $TOOL > >    and so clearly mark that it is an automagic generated mail by >    $TOOL. Every bit more information, like wh

Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-07 Thread Joerg Jaspert
On 11379 March 1977, Cameron Dale wrote: > Is that a bug, or were my assumptions wrong? FWIW, I think using real > (not pseudo) mail headers is a mildly better solution, but I'm happy > either way. Bug, should be in (real) headers. :) -- bye, Joerg I wrote this thing but it really sucks Awe

Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-07 Thread Cameron Dale
On 5/7/08, Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11378 March 1977, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > I think it would be very nice to press these into some common form, such as > > X-Debian: BTS > > X-Debian: DAK > > X-Debian: PTS > > X-Debian: BTS-link > > > Maybe there is a quasi-standard

Processed: Uniform control field for automated package maintenance emails (was: Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails)

2008-05-07 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 479953 uniform control field for automated package maintenance emails Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails Changed Bug title to `uniform control field for automated package maintenance emails' from

Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-07 Thread Joerg Jaspert
On 11378 March 1977, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I think it would be very nice to press these into some common form, such as > X-Debian: BTS > X-Debian: DAK > X-Debian: PTS > X-Debian: BTS-link > Maybe there is a quasi-standard for constructing these X- headers. While I think most of daks mails do

Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-07 Thread Lars Wirzenius
On ke, 2008-05-07 at 11:52 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > * ^X-Debian-PR-Message: > * ^X-Katie: > * ^X-PTS- > * > ^From:.*(installer|katie|dak)@((ftp-master|spohr)\.debian\.org|backports\.org) > * ^From: DDPOMail robot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * ^X-BTS-Link: > > I think it would be very nice to pr

Bug#479953: uniform header for automated package maintenance emails

2008-05-07 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Package: general Severity: wishlist With all the (helpful) email that a package maintainer gets nowadays, BTS, PTS, Dak, DDPOMail robot, BTS link, etc., it becomes ever weirder to just filter them into appropriate mail folders. To illustrate that, here are procmail rules that I have assembled