Em Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:25:18 -0400 Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > @Greg, BTW: should this be stable+noautosel@xxxxxxxxxx or have a > > 'vger.' > > No vger, just stable+whatever@xxxxxxxxxx. > > > in it, e.g. stable+noautosel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx? I assume without 'vger.' > > is fine, just wanted to be sure, as > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst in all other cases > > specifies stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, so people are likely to get confused. > > :-/ #sigh > > These serve two different purposes: > > stable@xxxxxxxxxx (goes into devnull) > stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (actual mailing list) > > Confusion happens all the time, unfortunately. Yeah, I did already used stable@xxxxxxxxxx a few times in the past. IMO, the best would be either for stable to also accept it or for kernel.org mail server to return an error message (only to the submitter) warning about the invalid address, eventually with a hint message pointing to the correct value. > > Notably, even if someone uses stable+noautosel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, it won't > do anything terrible (it won't bounce, it'll just quietly go into > nowhere because that's not a valid expansion command). > > -K >
