On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 06:42:38 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 30 March 2007 at 00:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> The setup is not borked. Sending in a non mangled ballot works
>> fine.
> ... which only works with certain MUAs, and which ones is not
> documented anywhere. I call that borked.
No, it workswith every single standards compliant MUA out
there. And whether or not a MUA supports the standard is pretty well
known, really.
Non comformant MUAs have problems -- and since they do not
follow the standards, who knows what kind of problems they have.
> It wouldn't kill you to __just document__ that you (even explicitly)
> switched from 7bit (used in the past) to 8bit/utf8 (which is not
> supported well enough in conjunction with pgp/pgp). Can't you just
> do that, please? people generated dozens of failed b
You want me to document that you have to send in standards
compliant email to the voting system?
>> Anyway, I'm done with this conversation.
> Yes, it has long stopped being useful. Probably right from your
> first reply when you (basically) insisted on stating that everything
> is always peachy everywhere, and has always been.
Hey, everyone knows there are all kinds of buggy software out
there. Conformant mailers don't have a problem. Buggy mailers
do. Why is this a surprise?
manoj
--
Such efforts are almost always slow, laborious, political, petty,
boring, ponderous, thankless, and of the utmost criticality. --
Leonard Kleinrock, on standards efforts
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
