Bug 7620 - Proposed change to release process document
Summary: Proposed change to release process document
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Spamassassin
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Building & Packaging (show other bugs)
Version: 3.4 SVN branch
Hardware: All All
: P2 enhancement
Target Milestone: 3.4.3
Assignee: SpamAssassin Developer Mailing List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-09-16 21:52 UTC by Sidney Markowitz
Modified: 2018-09-17 15:50 UTC (History)
3 users (show)


Attachment Type Modified Status Actions Submitter/CLA Status
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Sidney Markowitz 2018-09-16 21:52:30 UTC 
After seeing the number of reply-alls to the announcement message for the release of 3.4.2, I propose that we change the step in build/README to specify that the announcement be sent in some way that would not have a reply-all go to all the lists that the announcement is sent to.

I can think so far of three possible ways to so that. I'm proposing that the README specify exactly one procedure that we decide on here, so that the README leaves no ambiguity for the step.

Three examples that would accomplish this are: 1) Send separate emails, one to each mailing list address (more work for the release manager); 2) Send it To the announce list (since reply-all will always end up moderated anyway) with Bcc to the other lists (so ordinary reply to the list will work, but reply-all will not have the negative effect); 3) Send it To some dummy or no-reply address that we come up with, with Bcc to all the lists

I would like to come to a consensus on how to do this and the make the change in the README.
Comment 1 Kevin A. McGrail 2018-09-17 11:06:07 UTC 
+1 to the need for this issue.

I think sending to yourself as the To:, Bcc'ing all lists and setting a reply-to the dev@ list makes the most sense to me.

Regards,
KAM
Comment 2 Sidney Markowitz 2018-09-17 11:13:38 UTC 
(In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #1)

I like your suggestion better than any of the ones I said.
Comment 3 Kevin A. McGrail 2018-09-17 11:22:59 UTC 
Thanks.  Appreciate you flagging it.

3.4:
Committed revision 1841067.
Trunk:
Committed revision 1841068.
Comment 4 John Hardin 2018-09-17 15:50:15 UTC 
(In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #1)

> I think sending to yourself as the To:, Bcc'ing all lists and setting a
> reply-to the dev@ list makes the most sense to me.

+1 on this approach from me as well.