Please add some language to the top of Bugzilla e-mails specifying that recipients reply by adding a comment to the bug in question rather than attempting to reply diectly to Bugzilla or the previous respondent via return e-mail. This will hopefully dissuade novice users from sending unwanted e-mails to bug triagers. Such language might be something like this: "ATTENTION: please do not reply to this bug via e-mail, either to Bugzilla or the person who changed the bug. To respond, add your reply directly to the bug in question. Thank you."
OS: Mac System 9.x → All
Hardware: Macintosh → All
Summary: Add no-reply language to Bugzilla e-mails → Add "don't reply via e-mail" language to Bugzilla e-mails
*** Bug 151366 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Assignee: endico → gerv
Revised text suggestion: "ATTENTION: please do not reply to this message by e-mail. To respond, add your 'Additional Comment' directly to the bug in question. Thank you."
In our experience, people get irritated very quickly with additions to bugmail which do not add function. The whole %reasonsbody% thing was an example of this. We thought very hard about how to minimise the impact of the "configure bugmail" addition. In that light, any message which begins "ATTENTION:" is definitely not acceptable, unless there is some method of turning it off. My alternative strategy was to do one of two things: 1) Set the Reply-To: address on bugmails to an invalid address which mail user agents will flag up or 2) Have an auto-responder on the From: address which says "Post in the bug, please." Gerv Gerv
The latter, please. that way people who don't care don't have to see this all the time.
An auto-responder has to be set up on a per-installation basis (at the moment, at any rate) - so if you want one for b.m.o., file a bug on mozilla.org/Server Ops. Gerv
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
*** Bug 231114 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug was wontfixed when Mozilla was still a very developer-centric organization. Now that we're catering to end-users, this is worth revisiting again. RedHat's Bugzilla bugmail has this at the top of each: ----- Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. ----- It doesn't say "ATTENTION" and it's not very big. I think that wording would work, here, too.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
I remember how irritating %reasonsbody% was when it arrived on b.m.o. How about a compromise - we add a section to the customisation part of the Bugzilla Guide saying "You may want to add text to the param (hopefully soon to be template) to tell people not to reply to emails."? Gerv
This isn't for the Bugzilla project (anyone can already change the mail templates and most people do). This is for bugzilla.mozilla.org specifically. I think there's too much whitespace at the top of the bugmails currently. Replace some of that whitespace with the above text, and we don't have any vertical displacement, and we get a lot of benefit to all the new folks using Bugzilla.
It's not about vertical displacement, though. It's about the irritation that comes from reading text when you know exactly what it says, but can't stop yourself reading it. What's wrong with the autoresponder solution? Gerv
An auto-responder seems like the right solution here. It obtrudes only for whom necessary, as opposed to for everyone. We could also change "bugzilla-daemon" to something like "post-to-bug-instead-of-replying", although that would undoubtedly break enough mail filters that we should consider it only if an auto-responder doesn't solve the problem effectively enough.
Autoresponders are a quick way to get us blacklisted by lots of the anti-spam blacklists. Someone only needs to "joe job" the responder address with a spam that's sure to get bounced by lots of site's mail filters, our autoresponder than gleefully replies to all of the bounces (blocked spam often comes from "postmaster" or the like rather than <> like a real bounce) and people then report our autoreply as spam.
Although I suppose we could train it to only reply to mail that has a bug number in the subject...
Bug 153051 has suggested text. Gerv
A quick scan of the apache mailbox on mecha shows that we get on average about 10 attempts per day to reply to bugmail. (and 1400 bounces per day, but that's another issue) On September 23, there were almost exactly 1400 emails delivered to email@example.com. 1375 of those were bounce notices. 10 were spam. 15 were people attempting to reply to bugmail. Spotchecks of those 15 emails revealed that only 2 of the 15 had discovered their reply never made it and re-posted their reply on the bug. 3 of the ones that didn't make it to the bug were the reporter replying to UNCONFIRMED bugs stating that the problem had been solved, and the bug could be closed. 1 of those bugs had been resolved as a duplicate already. The other two were still open. An auto-reply is not user friendly at all. Especially if we didn't warn them in the bugmail. I think our best option long-term is to get the real inbound email support in Bugzilla (Joel came up with the idea of using SRS authentication for it, so we could verify that the message was a reply to a bugmail and to whom the message they replied to was sent). Short term I think we're better off adding a line to the top of the bugmail stating that you can't reply to it. My suggested text: ================== Please do not reply to this email. You can add comments at (url goes here) ================== That adds ONE line to the email (the URL is already there), and since it's the very first thing in the email, I'm willing to bet most people who are used to Bugzilla won't even notice it's there because they're used to skipping over the URL except when they're about to click on it. The people who've never seen Bugzilla bugmail before will probably see it.
I dread inbound email support, because I strongly suspect we'll end up with serious issues with comment bloat caused by lack of trimming. But that's another issue too :-) Let's add the line on b.m.o. and see what reaction is like. Gerv
Assignee: gerv → justdave
Status: REOPENED → NEW
Priority: -- → P3
(In reply to comment #17) > Let's add the line on b.m.o. and see what reaction is like. Done. (prompted by Jesse's comments in bug 153051)
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago → 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Belatedly VERIFIED using TB 1.5.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Component: Bugzilla: Other b.m.o Issues → General
Product: mozilla.org → bugzilla.mozilla.org
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.