Future of gccbug

[Daniel Berlin]

On Nov 7, 2003, at 3:51 PM, Phil Edwards wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:11:59PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> gnat-dev@buzco.nyct.net writes:
>>
>> | I find the mail and WWW interfaces +both+ useful, but it would be 
>> nicer
>> | if bugzilla mail +visibly+ came from bugzilla.
>>
>> I would add one more whish.  Threads managed by bugzilla is painful to
>> follow: The reason is that it does not keep proper references.  The 
>> end
>> result is a "flat" thread where every reply gets paranted by the first
>> message, instead of the usual thread tree.
>
> Yes, it goes into "Kenner mode" because (the last time I investigated 
> this,
> very briefly) keeping track of the References header was a hard problem
> for something that wasn't inherently an email client.  I think this was
> being worked on in the then-current development branch of bugzilla.

Um, I *do* track the references, and it outputs a References and 
In-Reply-To header.

I'm not sure why your email client ignores it, mine threads them fine 
now (as does Pine).

>
>
>> I have a question:  with previous gntas, I could ask for retreiving a
>> set of bug reports (with gnat-query) which I can consult later 
>> *off-line*.
>> Is there an equivalent thing with bugzilla?  Last-time I tried 
>> "query",
>> it only stores an url, whereas I was asking for "physical"  copies of
>> the reports.
>

> Not that I know of... Dan?
>

There is an interface that lets you request bug-reports by email, i 
just never set it up.