>> But I feel I have to advocate for those who oppose any solution which
requires signing up anywhere as I can understand those people very well.

On this topic:

when I try to send an email to zsh-users@zsh.org from my main gmail
(foo@gmail) using a different 'From' field (foo2@gmail) it sends an
automated response:
Delivery to the following recipient has been delayed: zsh-users@zsh.org Message
will be retried for 0 more day(s)
[and keeps failing]

so i need to log to my other gmail (foo2@gmail) that i signed-up with to
this mailing list. So looks like there is still a need to sign-up with this
approach?
[not using my primary email because this mailing list shows email in the
open, unlike bug-trackers like the ones I listed]

Or am i doing something wrong?


On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
wrote:

> On Dec 31,  5:10pm, Timothee Cour wrote:
> }
> } What are your requirements for tracking zsh issues, and could this be
> } accomplished by a standard issue tracker (eg github/gitlab/bitbucket)
> } instead of this mailing list ?
>
> I think the answer to the "instead" part of that question is "no,"
> if only because of the long-standing practice of linking changes to
> discussion threads by use of the list archive article number.
>
> My personal requirements for any tracker that isn't the zsh-workers
> mailing list are (1) somebody else is responsible for operating it;
> (2) it's at least as useful to those of us who are updating the code
> as it is to the people who just want to report problems; and (3) I
> no longer have to carry on this discussion.
>
> By way of relatively recent analogy, we switched version control from
> CVS to git because the people who were proponents of the change got
> involved with the process, and provided suggestions/assistance/tools,
> and in several cases actually became involved in code maintenance.
> Without that degree of commitment to whatever bug tracker you propose
> we adopt, continuing to push it is just a distraction.
>