Re: Future of gccbug

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>]

> Hmm, then something is wrong somewhere.  Everything that is entered in
> bugzilla gets posted to me with a To: gcc-bugs and Reply-To: 
> gcc-bugzilla.

Which is correct, don't wide-reply.

> It happens that a wide-reply sends mails to both addresses and things
> get duplicated.  My suggestion is to have a separate list for
> gcc-bugzilla traffic.

This is why the top of the email says what it says :P

If i had any clue how our list software worked (i don't even know what 
the heck we use), i would make it ignore any replies where gcc-bugzilla 
is copied.

Remember, only copying gcc-bugzilla actually gets the comment into the 
database.

And we want all bug discussion to be in the bug db.
So don't copy gcc-bugs, only gcc-bugzilla.
> my mails are on a different server than my laptop and I see nothing
> misguided in keeping them in one place.  I see nothing misguided in
> using a terminal to run an editor that reads news, mails, edit codes,
> makes coffee...

:P
I use xemacs with xft patches on my mac.
Mmmm. antialiased fonts.