From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/77949 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: chad Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Outgoing mail defaults Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:27:06 -0400 Message-ID: <57C2C312-5FE3-4152-8ACB-8761813E8692@gmail.com> References: <41D75E0D-9F9E-4476-A6D3-93FA34156854@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082.1) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-571--28920562 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300400843 10930 80.91.229.12 (17 Mar 2011 22:27:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen , ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Reitter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 17 23:27:18 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q0Lf3-00073u-Lm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:27:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33905 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q0Lf3-0000R7-3y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:27:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55740 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q0Ley-0000R2-4F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:27:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q0Lex-0006y1-1Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:27:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.212.41]:41326) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q0Lew-0006xw-SD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:27:10 -0400 Original-Received: by vws4 with SMTP id 4so3843474vws.0 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:27:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=Zu1X1QOL4whPddFUQ1Qcuz7n0GNozNek/HQcYMNtju8=; b=DDwCJj/9TeR8JTxsijeteppVcneKTwaql1w0qm6TAhF7B39UCK0xzgKMJkX7RCsKTN UlH3J9JHSuzH5TFAvfw/jhTYB9/53gD04P6j3jlKUJ7rNmeAWs9tasyYXSltWuT8uXIz 39J2WWshzLsogDOxczr4wcaRuYFvAiIOiXl3k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=S3s7K2GxJV16G1UCrK3+T/fnPnRv1I+PkiQ8ATZbVbtdlaOQJKuOlg2Ab5cmWplDoR 9y3RWYX0cnEElmK/YWHhi4lw/uUHSOsVDj8dm0MfGxG3/IUZqAgUOVKJhIGhmoXUGrWp wXKuE87OQ3FyT83FiGhVBpn5AxBbdPKRL/z+8= Original-Received: by 10.220.5.129 with SMTP id 1mr80775vcv.169.1300400829636; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.57] (70-91-197-126-BusName-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [70.91.197.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u4sm814909vch.36.2011.03.17.15.27.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <41D75E0D-9F9E-4476-A6D3-93FA34156854@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082.1) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.212.41 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:137378 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:77949 Archived-At: --Apple-Mail-571--28920562 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 17, 2011, at 3:02 PM, David Reitter wrote: >=20 > Making it listen on port 80 would be easier than installing a = server-side script taking a POST request on port 80. > OTOH, Ted's suggestion about the hashcash seems very attractive, = especially if the SMTP server would forward bug reports to other = packages in the process. Do you think we can expect hashcash to reasonably work in the case were = the user hasn't configured emacs, it's not working, and sending mail = doesn't work? I don't know the details of the hashcash implementation, = but a quick internet search suggest that emacs would need to = successfully communicate with a subprocess to a binary that isn't likely = to be installed. Hope that helps, *Chad= --Apple-Mail-571--28920562 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Making it listen = on port 80 would be easier than installing a server-side script taking a = POST request on port 80.
OTOH, Ted's suggestion about the hashcash = seems very attractive, especially if the SMTP server would forward bug = reports to other packages in the = process.

Do you think we can expect = hashcash to reasonably work in the case were the user hasn't configured = emacs, it's not working, and sending mail doesn't work? I don't know the = details of the hashcash implementation, but a quick internet search = suggest that emacs would need to successfully communicate with a = subprocess to a binary that isn't likely to be = installed.

Hope that = helps,
*Chad
= --Apple-Mail-571--28920562--