RFC: FAS E-mail == Bugzilla E-mail?

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 02:02:33PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Warren Togami (wtogami at redhat.com) said: 
> > Implementation
> > ==============
> > 1) Most users are already fine.
> > 2) Those users who do not yet match, they have the option of either:
> >    a) Change their FAS e-mail address.
> >    b) Change their Bugzilla address. (this requires a one-time change 
> > by dkl in the Bugzilla database)
> > 
> > Benefits
> > ========
> > - owners.list contains FAS account names instead of arbitrary e-mail 
> > addresses.
> > - Those account names can be directly used by the VCS ACL
> > - Simplified view in Package Database
> > 
> > Key question
> > ============
> > Is this an unreasonable requirement?  Please comment.
> 
> The public availability of bugzilla e-mails has caused people to
> use specific e-mail addresses for that (presumably for spamtrapping);
> they may not want to use this for general Fedora mail.

But the mail is only exposed to other bugzilla registered users, so
email scraping by spam bots is already prohibited to a large extend.

> FWIW, the account<->bugzilla discrepancy applies to all of 8 users,
> at the moment. So I'm not sure how critical it is.

It makes sense to ask those 8 to use the FAS-account in bugzilla and
close the matter :)
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20070206/1602ff37/attachment.sig>