s...@feb17.org wrote on Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 07:16:01 -0700: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 06:14:30AM -0500, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > > It should also be pointed out that a spammer could easily subscribe > > directly to the list and get all the address information that way, > > completely by passing any archives. > > > > For completeness, the ASF's public archive policy, which we adhere to, > > is here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/public-archives.html > > > > Best, > > -Hyrum > > At least that's a tiny bit more work for them to sign up for every email > list serve in the world. Harvesting openly published email addresses is > just too easy. They would ideally never appear anywhere in the first > place so they couldn't be mirrored. I understand your constrants but > I still think this is appalling from an engineering point of view and > won't participate if it means leaving a please spam me trail behind me.
Nearly all open-source projects rely on email communications, and most are publicly archived in >1 places. You could use auto-expiring email addresses (for example, address-$((1+$(date +%Y%m%d)))@domain) --- they are still valid but pretty useless for spammers. > Sorry, > > Darren > > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Darren, > > > > > > Over a dozen sites mirror our archives, usually by grabbing our published > > > mbox for the list. As a result, we cannot control how they publish the > > > email > > > addresses contained within. It is also important for those mboxes to > > > retain > > > the email addresses for archival purposes, and so those third-party > > > systems > > > can allow proper replies (hopefully, only by humans, but as you've > > > discovered... they are not all perfect). > > > > > > Sorry for any inconvenience, but please don't blame us. We do try to > > > respect > > > your privacy in our own web archive system. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > -g > > > > > > On Jun 18, 2012 5:10 AM, <s...@feb17.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> Less than 2 months after using this mailing list I've started getting > > >> spam > > >> to the custom email address I used to post here. I think it's terrible > > >> practice to openly publish email addresses in easily harvestable form. > > >> I'll > > >> be /dev/nulling this address and unsubscribing. I hope you could > > >> reconsider > > >> that policy, > > >> > > >> Darren > > >> > > >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:05:52PM -0700, daz wrote: > > >> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 07:58:10AM -0500, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > > >> > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Philip Martin > > >> > > <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: > > >> > > > s...@feb17.org writes: > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> A little more information on this. I have probably rebuilt svn > > >> > > >> about 20 times tonight from scratch, with > > >> > > > >> > Thanks to everyone who contributed useful clues on this. Using the > > >> > current code tree and rebuilding with different versions and > > >> > combinations of > > >> > libraries I narrowed the problem down to the apr version. Either the > > >> > build > > >> > of my earlier apr 1.3.9 or the version itself was the problem. The > > >> > test > > >> > suite was super helpful and the explanation about XFAIL vs FAIL. I > > >> > have a > > >> > build using apr 1.4.6 that passes all the tests it should pass and more > > >> > importantly actually works. It might be helpful to print a reminder > > >> > at > > >> > the end of the default make step suggesting running the tests if this > > >> > is a > > >> > common problem. There are a lot of dependencies and some of them seem > > >> > to be > > >> > a bit finicky. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks! > > >> > Darren > > > > > > > > -- > > > > uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy > > http://www.uberSVN.com/
