From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/80327 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: smtp crap Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:04:23 +0800 Message-ID: <87r52inw60.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8739f4kzp3.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ipo0p1bc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <58C87CB9F44943A7BBE78F2D6B62A850@us.oracle.com> <83botsf06d.fsf@gnu.org> <83k48cxj85.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318428298 19175 80.91.229.12 (12 Oct 2011 14:04:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , larsi@gnus.org, Eli Zaretskii , Drew Adams , miles@gnu.org To: PJ Weisberg Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 16:04:53 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RDzQS-0007Yt-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:04:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49918 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDzQS-0006VU-AG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:04:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35523) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDzQL-0006VF-1W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:04:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDzQF-0000Dk-CA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:04:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]:42193) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDzQD-0000DE-Pj; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:04:37 -0400 Original-Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4so104762pzk.6 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:04:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bVwonLGuIjrgNfDm4ZOo1jX57BpHk1hGcvMTXo+mTYk=; b=ahuE/2TRcCgKQHvhlA4+7xSR60fKrb+K8LCYehHG74trl4eXfX/2tpPCtGW7fS19LZ h7vSRcBp5AkyCWF+wjytFldDt1YsYmhbF1uKyKXw2prTbK22QX9du6c1SuWSOAOEyb5J uIWEcBUThaH761pEBgIJZmUEKKKS98am0vbxA= Original-Received: by 10.68.2.163 with SMTP id 3mr1576790pbv.25.1318428276230; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:04:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from home.jasonrumney.net ([180.75.116.96]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z1sm312980pbl.5.2011.10.12.07.04.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by home.jasonrumney.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E417B285F; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:04:23 +0800 (MYT) In-Reply-To: (PJ Weisberg's message of "Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:00:45 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.210.47 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:145006 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80327 Archived-At: PJ Weisberg writes: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Drew Adams wrote: > >> But MOST importantly, what about reporting bugs with `emacs -Q'? >> >> That is the real problem here, and the one that you keep >> ignoring. =C2=A0Instead, you >> keep focusing on the problem of customization, which is, relatively >> speaking, no >> big deal (assuming you finish fixing the repeated-interrogation bugs). > > No, that's not the real problem. There are two problems: > (1) What should Emacs do when the user asks it to send an email? > (2) What should Emacs do when the user asks it to report a bug? > > This series of questions is appropriate in scenario 1, but not in > scenario 2. In scenario 1, the inclusion of mailclient is a bit pointless - if a user wants to set Emacs up as a MUA, then they won't want their mail going through another MUA. So these questions are obviously intended for scenario 2. > report-emacs-bug. The argument Drew is making would disappear > instantly if report-emacs-bug sent an HTTP POST request, for instance. Then we'd have to start asking the user questions about their proxy server. It isn't really an improvement.