ccing a person in mail to malone should subscribe them to the bugs affected.

On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:32:40PM -0000, Robert Collins wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> 09:28 < lifeless> do you think, that if I send an email to new-bugs,
> cc'd to $person, malone would be sane in subscrbing $person
> automatically?

There was some discussions before, whether to subscribe people if they
were CC:ed, and there were some strong opinions against it. Malone does
offer a way of subscribing people, using the 'subscribe' command, so
I'm not sure we need another way.

On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 10:26 +0000, Björn Tillenius wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:32:40PM -0000, Robert Collins wrote:
> > Public bug reported:
> >
> > 09:28 < lifeless> do you think, that if I send an email to new-bugs,
> > cc'd to $person, malone would be sane in subscrbing $person
> > automatically?
>
> There was some discussions before, whether to subscribe people if they
> were CC:ed, and there were some strong opinions against it. Malone does
> offer a way of subscribing people, using the 'subscribe' command, so
> I'm not sure we need another way.

Oh. That seems like quite a shame to me - the most natural way of
organising a three-way conversation via email is to email two people,
and have them both reply-to-all... which is the equivalent of
subscribing to the bug in malone terms.

At the least, when filing a new bug with an email to a person and to
Malone, Malone could email the filer with a comment that the person they
cc'd has -not- been subscribed, and how to do a subscription.

Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

> At the least, when filing a new bug with an email to a person and to
> Malone, Malone could email the filer with a comment that the person they
> cc'd has -not- been subscribed, and how to do a subscription.

I requested something like this just now. It is bug 96597. Thanks for the idea Rob.

We maybe shouldn't explicitly subscribe CCs to the bugs, the the CC field should be retain for sent notifications, or something like that.

On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 15:40 +0000, Björn Tillenius wrote:
> We maybe shouldn't explicitly subscribe CCs to the bugs, the the CC
> field should be retain for sent notifications, or something like that.

Possibly. OTOH I think CC'ing people to subscribe them is much more
natural and easy than:
 -CC to get them on your message
 -subscribe <lpusername> to get them to recieve follow ups.

-Rob

--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.