Re: Bugzilla (Mutt Next Generation)
Hello Christoph,
On Friday, January 28, 2005 at 1:50:59 PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Adeodato proposed to add whitelisting to a debbugs-based BTS.
Basic and single whitelisting is not efficient IMHO. I remember
receiving spam by *you*, and recently received (real) bounces from
trithemius, for viruses I sent.
> * I can setup a debbugs BTS with the above.
> * Or we use Werner's bugzilla.
> Votes/comments on that? (I'm voting for debbugs+whitelisting.)
I vote for debbugs also.
Gnats and Bugzilla are web-based which I dislike, and Bugzilla is
not really friendly to the occasional bug-hunter. Not as friendly as
Debbugs. Another web+mail BTS I tried (was it RT?) was ugly on the mail
side: Broken threads, rewritten restructured mails, munged titles,
impersonified senders... Beuark!
Debbugs has only 2 problems: Spam sensibility, and ugly
encapsulation of mails to "-done" (happily circumventable by "close"
control directive).
Whatever: I'm more than happy to see the movement again. Thank you
ALL for your efforts, big or little, past or future. Glop glop. :-))
Bye! Alain.
--
Whitelisting?
See the archives for more discussion on why this should,
like hydrogen for dirigibles, be relegated to the past.
PCC DTG on MU. © August 2004.