[Mageia-bugsquad] Differentiate mails concerning update candidates and backports candidates (and ideally mga1/2)

[Manuel Hiebel]

Le 05/07/2012 22:34, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
>
>
> We envisioned 2 different solutions at tonights QA meeting, but maybe 
> you have other ideas.
>
>
>
> *** Solution 1 : a qa-backports mailing list ***
>
> Bug reports for backport validation would have to be assigned to 
> qa-backports instead of qa-bugs.
>
>
>
> *** Solution 2 : formatted bug summary ***
>
> We would keep only one mailing list, but mail subjects would have to 
> contain the needed information.
>
>
> Example:
>
> - [qa-bugs] [Bug 6707] Update: mumble new security issue CVE-2012-0863
>
> - [qa-bugs] [Bug 5142] Backport: tremulous 3.0
>
>
> This would mean more work for packagers and bugsquad to make sure the 
> bug report has a well-formatted summary.
>
>
> Ideally, it would be good if we could see also from the mail subject 
> what version(s) of Mageia the update or backport is for, such as :
>
>
> - [qa-bugs] [Bug 6707] Update: mumble new security issue CVE-2012-0863 
> [mga1]
>
> - [qa-bugs] [Bug 5142] Backport: tremulous 3.0 [mga1][mga2]
>
>
>
> What solution do you think we should choose? #1, #2, another one? And 
> if we go for solution #1 do you think we can still have the [mgaX] 
> part (like was done on some bugs already)?
>

What about modify the email directly send to the mailing ? I'm pretty 
sure we can add specific item in the subject for a mailing (but don't 
know if it's the right things to do) or playing with the component/keyword.
Maybe ask lpsolit if there is other way.

http://svnweb.mageia.org/web/templates/bugzilla/trunk/email/newchangedmail.txt.tmpl?revision=261&view=markup

I guess a solution like #2 is better for everyone.

-- 
Manuel Hiebel
http://netiquette.fr/