Re: [John Moreno <phenix@interpath.com>] Re: GNKSA and Gnus

[John Moreno <phenix@interpath.com>]

[Added Russ Allbery to recipients]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:

>Here's the latest GNKSA evaluation report.  16c has been fixed, I
>think, but 7c will not be fixed.

7c is a requirement that makes it compatible with son-of-1036, and is in there to acknowledge a problem with some SERVERS - i.e. ones that don't handle long lines.  Son-of-1036 specifies that it not be longer than 1000 octets including EOL (2 octets to allow for dos cr/lf), and that (from left to right) the first reference and the last three never be deleted.  Note that 1036 ALLOWS this but doesn't set any guidelines for when and how to do so.  Also note that this should allow any one message to have references going back between 30-40 messages.  This seems, well, not to harsh to me - and can easily result in messages where the references header is much larger than the message itself.

>The GNKSA has evolved from a sensible bare-bones minimum thang into
>something, uh, else, and I think the whole think has become
>pointless.  Gnus will therefore from now on not strive for GNKSA
>compliance.  

I'm sorry to hear that - if you have fixed 16c then the only thing that's out of place is 7c and this can result in either the users server not accepting the article or other servers not propagating their messages.

>-- 
>(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
>  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
>------- Start of forwarded message -------
>Karl-Johan Noren wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>> Also did you send a copy of the review to the author?
>>
>>Nope - but I guess I should have, and I don't have the review
>>available on the computer I use right now (I'm not sure it's
>>still on my Unix account either). Gnus have a homepage at
>>
>>   http://www.gnus.org/
>>
>>though, I think.
>
>Well here it is:
>
>============================================================================
>
>                                          GNKSA   Evaluation  Form  v2.0
>
>
>Product Name           : Gnus
>Product Version        : 5.3
>Tested on platform     : Unix/GNU Emacs 19.34
>Available for platforms: Emacs 19
>Evaluation date        : December 10, 1997
>Evaluated by           : Karl-Johan Norén
>
>
>Summary
>=======
>
>Regarding the strict GNKSA requirements (MUSTs), this software:
>
>[ ] PASSES, hence can from now on proudly carry the Seal.
>[X] FAILS on the following points:
>    7c   Does not restrict references sensibly
>    16c  Does not warn when posting quoted text only
>
>
>Additionally, the software violates the `soft' GNKSA requirements
>(SHOULDs) in the following way:
>    10d  Does not omit (proper) signatures from quoted text
>    10e  Does not let the user indicate which part to followup to
>    10g  Attribution line lacks Message-ID of original article
>    16b  Does not refuse posting an empty article
>    16d  Does not refuse to post quoted text only
>    16f  Does not try to prevent posting multiple copies entirely
>
>
>The software sports the following nice net-keeping features unmentioned
>by the GNKSA:
>
>Fully customisable via elisp.

10d  - speaks for itself.
10e  - this applies more to GUI newsreaders and allows them to select the
       portion of the article which they intend to respond to.  It also
       allows the user to include the sig if wanted. 
10g  - well, I disagree with this one myself.  But it's not a requirement,
       and several newsreaders can use it to get that article.
16b  - I guess this could be necessary with some control messages.
16d  - I'm not sure why somebody would need to post a message that was only 
       quoted.
16f  - Does gnus really do this?  Post the same article multiple times?

-- 
John Moreno