I can definitely agree with "state at the top that you're going to be replying inline below", especially if you're not going to have any "summary text" below the message.
-- Jacob Helwig On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:12:11 -0700, Luke Kanies wrote: > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:12:11 -0700 > From: Luke Kanies <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Puppet-dev] [PATCH/puppet 1/2] Port > Puppet::SSLCertificates::CA > test to rspec > Message-ID: <5825937344242576...@unknownmsgid> > > This is actually standard practice and really does make a difference > in how quickly we can scan code comments. > > It's also at least convention to make clear in that top reply whether > there are actual comments inline, too, since there often aren't. > > -- > http://puppetlabs.com/ | +1-615-594-8199 | @puppetmasterd > > On Sep 23, 2010, at 18:27, Jacob Helwig <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Actually, for me, it's harder to top-post, since my mail client is setup > > to automatically put me just above my signature (below the quoted email) > > when composing. ;-) > > > > If it's standard practice, because that's what we want, then I'll change > > what I do. If it's standard practice because most people are using the > > gmail web interface, and are lazy... ;-) So...in light of what appear > > to be a number of ambiguities in our processes, as of late: Should I > > actually change what I'm doing, or were you just trying to save me some > > effort? (Top-posted, assuming the former.) > > > > -- > > Jacob Helwig > > > > On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 17:43:58 -0700, Luke Kanies wrote: > >> > >> Btw, it's far easier (and standard practice on the list) to top-reply > >> for responses to code, given how long the code usually is. > >> > >> -- > >> http://puppetlabs.com/ | +1-615-594-8199 | @puppetmasterd > >> >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
