Earlier today, I filed a bug report against the devuan testing version
of 'mutt', but because I was using the stable version of devuan, and the
stable version of reportbug, the report went to debian.

Now, that was incompetent. Was it incompetent of me or of devuan or
both?

Updating a recipient email address in a package isn't some major effort
that requires new testing repository dependencies - it's probably just a
debian quilt patch, and a trivial one at that.

The results are:

1] wasteful and unnecessary period of confusion and correspondence to
clear up the situation;

2] increased negative reputation for the project in that it's not
playing nicely with its parent project;

3] increased wariness of reporting bugs;

4] increased wariness of depending on the distribution for anything
critical.

4.1] What an observer to the project can expect to see is a community
expending much time and effort engaging in all kinds of very lengthy
off-topic discussions, with an *extremely* low signal-noise-ratio,
while certificates are left to expire multiple times, where scheduled
outages are only announced to the "campfire" list, not the "announce"
or "developer" list, and where bugs for the stable release are sent
(only) to another distribution.

Was this constructive?

--
hkp://keys.gnupg.net
CA45 09B5 5351 7C11 A9D1 7286 0036 9E45 1595 8BC0