From MSchwartz at mn.rr.com  Wed Jun 22 21:38:51 2005
From: MSchwartz at mn.rr.com (Marc Schwartz)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:38:51 -0500
Subject: [Rd] Suggestion for the R Bugs web page
In-Reply-To: <x27jgmcieb.fsf@turmalin.kubism.ku.dk>
References: <1119453300.19120.45.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<17081.38677.931319.484899@stat.math.ethz.ch>
	<1119460145.19120.70.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<x27jgmcieb.fsf@turmalin.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <1119469131.19120.98.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 21:15 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
> 
> > > Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered
> > > complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which
> > > would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
> > 
> > Bugzilla?  ;-)
> > 
> > JitterBug of course is no longer actively maintained by the Samba folks.
> 
> X-actly. No need for the smiley. Apart from the maintenance issue, we
> also have the problem of spam injection, aggravated by the fact that
> Jitterbug is chopping headers off incoming mail, so that it looks like
> it comes from us. We did get blackholed at one point - the entire
> pubhealth department...

Ouch. That's not good.

Perhaps that's one of many reasons that the Samba folks themselves have
switched to Bugzilla?

> It would be a no-brainer to switch to Bugzilla, were it not for the
> 3000 or so messages that are already sitting in the Jitterbug
> database.  

Might the python script linked at the follow Bugzilla report be of use?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124869

See the attachment in Comment #1:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=69233

as the author's web site link appears to be offline. I don't know
python, so I would defer to others with more expertise as to whether the
above is useful "as is", or might serve as a starting point.

Marc



[Rd] Suggestion for the R Bugs web page
Marc Schwartz