On 15.08.24 19:25, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> Apart from the above issue, I'm -0.5 on what to me equates with
> automated spam to -hackers: the volume of mails would put this around
> the 16th most common sender on -hackers, with about 400 mails/year
> (based on 80 new patches for next CF, and 5 CFs/year, combined with
> Robert's 2023 statistics at [0]).
Yeah, I'd rather not open the can of worms that we send automated emails
to this list at all. If we do this, then there will be other requests,
and why this one and not that one. If people want to get emails from
the commitfest app, it should be that you subscribe there and it sends
those emails to those who want them.
> I also don't quite like the suggested contents of such mail: (1) and (2)
> are essentially duplicative information, and because CF's entries' IDs
> are not shown in the app the "with ID 0000" part of (1) is practically
> useless (better use the CFE's title), (3) would best be stored and/or
> integrated in the CFA, as would (4). Additionally, (4) isn't
> canonical/guaranteed to be up-to-date, see above. As for the
> "copy-pastable git commands" suggestion, I'm not sure that's applicable,
> for the same reasons that (4) won't work reliably. CFBot's repo to me
> seems more like an internal implementation detail of CFBot than an
> authorative source of patchset diffs.
I agree. And this also smells a bit like "my favorite workflow". Maybe
start with a blog post or a wiki page if you want to suggest this.
