Missing packagers (more info)

[Michael Schwendt]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:35:48 -0500, Ed Hill wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 03:30 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 16:59:20 -0500 (EST), Chris Ricker wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:02:08 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > 
> > > > And it is no fun to spend time on trying to contact people, who don't 
> > > > even take a second to reply in order to simply state whether they know 
> > > > about Fedora Extras already or what they're waiting for. A minimum of 
> > > > communication can't be so hard.
> > > 
> > > For whatever its worth, you blocked my email when I tried to reply to your 
> > > private "are you alive?" email. Other lost packagers you're trying to 
> > > reach may be in a similar situation....
> > 
> > Hmm, you're the first to say that. I'm not aware of my mail provider
> > causing such problems. Some fedora.us contributors I had mailed by
> > accident (not recognizing their e-mail addresses) managed to get back to
> > me quickly. Additionally, you have not reacted to bugzilla activity for a
> > very long time either.
> 
> 
> Hi Chris & Michael,
> 
> Were the blocked emails returned with some sort of SPF message?
> 
> If so, I had a similar problem trying to send emails to Micheal back in
> December.  And I sent him a follow-up email (from a completely different
> account) describing the problem.  In fact, heres the relevant parts
> again:
> 
>   This is a Delivery Status Notification (DSN).
>   I was unable to deliver your message to bugs.michael at gmx.net.
>   I said
>     RCPT TO:<bugs.michael at gmx.net>
>   And they gave me the error;
>     553 5.7.1 According to the domain's SPF record your host
>     '66.220.5.62' is not a designated sender.

Well, actually you managed to reach me from both your accounts. On the
same day you wrote: "Test email: just edited my DNS and am trying to get
through your SPF filter."  So, it was something you were able to fix at
your end and not a permanent problem with my address. :)

SPF was nothing new in December 2004. The most important thing about it
is, that for sender domains that have it enabled, you must use the
domain's mailserver or else the sender verification fails when a
destination mailserver relies on SPF.

But even in case of temporary MTS problems (which cannot be ruled out),
there's a difference between contributors like you, Ed, who responded to
bugzilla comments, and those who did not respond to bugzilla traffic
(e.g. reviews) or announcements (e.g. the Fedora pre-Extras and
bugzilla.redhat.com migration notification I've sent out with included
links, of course).

I mean, it was certainly possible to reply here at last,

  openbox fails to rebuild on FC3 (2004-11-25)
  https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2300

or in the Openbox v3 package request ticket, because Openbox v2 in the
repo was quite old anyway.

So, no mud-wrestling, please, as with bugzilla.fedora.us (apart from
relevant mailing lists) we certainly had a way to leave trackable
comments.