Re: Don't report new bugs for Rmail??

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:19:29 -0800
> From: Don Armstrong <address@hidden>
> 
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden>
> > > On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:19, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > Sorry, I'm not following: if there's no Rmail package, how come
> > > > the bug tracker finds bugs by that package? What am I missing?
> 
> Because there are bugs assigned to that package.

But you just said that a package named "rmail" does not exist, didn't
you?

> If rmail (or anything else) is going to be used as a valid package to
> assign bugs to, it should have a maintainer, and whoever wants it
> created should tell me that they want it created and what the
> maintainer is.

Rmail's maintainer is "FSF".  Which means that Emacs maintainers are
collectively responsible for maintaining Rmail.

> > Fine, but the "don't submit bug reports" request is misleading and
> > should be removed or rephrased, IMO.
> 
> Bug reports against packages that don't have a maintainer shouldn't be
> submitted

Well, that request can easily be interpreted as meaning that bug
reports against Rmail are not welcome.  I think this is not what we
want to say.

> In this case, the error is that no one has asked for the rmail
> package to be created.

It's IMO inconsistency to allow bugs be filed against a package that
doesn't exist.