From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/80313 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tim Cross Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: smtp crap Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:11:45 +1100 Message-ID: References: <8739f4kzp3.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ipo0p1bc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <58C87CB9F44943A7BBE78F2D6B62A850@us.oracle.com> <83botsf06d.fsf@gnu.org> <83k48cxj85.fsf@gnu.org> <20FFD44DE7DF42C78FDDA3EF06397A78@us.oracle.com> <83y5wrw53e.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318374721 21244 80.91.229.12 (11 Oct 2011 23:12:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 23:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, pj@irregularexpressions.net, larsi@gnus.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, miles@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 01:11:55 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 1RDlUH-0000pr-EW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:11:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50865 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDlUG-0007Mo-UX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:11:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46104) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDlUE-0007Mi-CY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:11:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDlUD-0000Px-Bk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:11:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]:52580) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDlUA-0000PP-9M; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:11:46 -0400 Original-Received: by iaen33 with SMTP id n33so128727iae.0 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:11:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1++qbAylYMzk6ETM8xJeeJ8PZV6Jl9aZDLwXsh/vHVs=; b=FaBsxFIi2JIp5HrhdE5Ke5Sgbaq0yVCtvYjhnwU8e+H/DPji2eBmDDAd94UG8+QhFK GxYMgBSqnCKXM0GE2yaezVgavCh6Yahrz02+v+KE7U4f5oGIIHdCjPMiJipvkNXDZ0Ho lGFsKANbPN4/t1BC37PYCJZIWU4cPIE82YNfw= Original-Received: by 10.231.50.202 with SMTP id a10mr12042304ibg.39.1318374705521; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.231.12.67 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:11:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83y5wrw53e.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.210.169 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:144930 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80313 Archived-At: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:21:41 +1100 >> From: Tim Cross >> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Stefan Monnier , >> =A0 =A0 =A0 PJ Weisberg , larsi@gnus.org, >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Eli Zaretskii , miles@gnu.org >> >> and please, DO NOT jump through all sorts of hoops with -Q to enable >> 'special' configuration settings to exist - the whole idea of -Q is >> that it is a base, well known and repeatable configuration. Once you >> start making exceptions that whole premise is lost. Using -Q should >> allow me to have exactly the same configuration as someone else who >> also runs -Q - it should not be 'the same configuration except for >> ....' If this means that users cannot submit bugs using emacs as their >> MUA when running -Q it does not mean we need to hack at custom or make >> exceptions - it means that email is not the right solution for >> submitting bug messages when running under -Q. > > Sorry, no. =A0That's unacceptable. =A0It was discussed long ago and > decided that the bug tracker will accept bug reports through email. > Trying to revert that, and during pretest at that, is a no-starter. > > There is a BIG difference between what the bug tracker accepts/does and how reports are entered into the system. There is also much that is inconsistent in these arguments. Preventing emacs from submitting bugs via email when running under -Q does not prevent the user form submitting the bug report using another email client. There should be NO exceptions to -Q - it should represent an emacs environment where ALL user configuration values are at their default settings. Making special exceptions just to allow the submission of bug reports via email is misguided and the thin edge of the wedge. Keep it clean and keep it simple. The -Q switch should be consistent and with no exceptions. There is no technical reason we could not have an http (or whatever protocol you prefer) to mail gateway that would allow the bugs to still be submitted to the bug tracker via email. If the big blocker to getting this right is that we are in pretest and therefore cannot make significant change, then surely, given that the current proposed solutions are less than adequate, the sensible solution is to delay making ANY change to default behaviour until we have a good solution. It makes no sense to push forward with something that obviously has significant usability issues because of some arbitrary pretest condition. If the arguments for changing the default are valid and the majority of emacs users have to use smtpmail rather than local MTAs or don't configure emacs as a MUA and the default MUA settings are most often broken due to misconfigured local MTAs, then email submission under -Q is already broken for a majority of users and has been for some time. Therefore, leaving things as they are until the post-24 release is not going to make matters worse. Tim --=20 Tim Cross