October 31 has many more with perl -V than without. I see no pattern.
Bad (October 31):
FAIL WWW-Patent-Page-0.106.0 cygwin-thread-multi-64int 1.5.24(0.15642)
PASS PDL-2.4.3_01 cygwin-thread-multi-64int 1.5.24(0.15642)
Good (October 31) except as noted:
PASS Net-Amazon-EC2-
> Was there anything different between the test runs?
>
Nothing I can see. Instructive is the performance on Oct 27, when every report
was missing perl -V except one in the middle of everything. I have no idea
what is different, but if you want me to test new versions of anything, I am
more
>
> Do you know what it was about my email address
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] that looked spammy?
Yes. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If people can put some sort of tag in their envelope from
(i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]) it would help, although
we've got better long term plans.
-R
Hi Mike,
> I am not as sure as you are that perl -V is always included by the
> modules in the report. Here are two of my mailings, where I use the
> smtp included by google mail. I did not alter these by hand.
CPAN-Reporter, CPAN-YACSmoke and CPANPLUS-YACSmoke all include the perl
-V info, so
I think you are right that the problem is whether perl -V is in the report.
I am not as sure as you are that perl -V is always included by the modules in
the report. Here are two of my mailings, where I use the smtp included by
google mail. I did not alter these by hand.
Are there any public
> We don't block Google. We block high volume email
> senders who look
> like they are using spammy email addresses.
>
> I've unblocked you.
>
> -R
>
Thank you for unblocking me.
Do you know what it was about my email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] that looked
spammy?
I think all I ever di
Hi Mike,
The problem here is that the original reports that were submitted are
missing the 'perl -V' section that is tagged to the end of the report.
As a result the automatic parsing tools are unable to determine the
exact Perl version and OS settings.
On my TODO list is to review a number of th
>
> What was the envelope sender of the original mail?
>
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was reje
> Note on
> http://www.cpantesters.org/show/Win32-API.html#Win32-API-0.57
> :
>
> NA 2455040 0 on (darwin-2level)
>
> and
>
> PASS 2456550 0 on (cygwin-thread-multi-64int)
>
> These do not note the perl version so OS as is typical for
> most reports, i.e.:
>
> PASS 2515775 5.10.0 on MSWin3
On Nov 2, 2008, at 16:10, David Golden wrote:
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
p.s. It appears you reject email from google mail. That seem a
little extreme.
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical details of pe
We don't block Google. We block high volume email senders who look
like they are using spammy email addresses.
I've unblocked you.
-R
Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 2, 2008, at 16:10, David Golden wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> p.s.
11 matches
Mail list logo
