Hello Jay,
Monday, July 18, 2005, 14:56:44, you wrote:
>>So, pardon me, but no one could have guessed from what you wrote that
>>this MSI was going to be the beginning of another round of beta
>>testing (preliminary to an official release). Rather, the only thing
>>you asked us to check was wheth
7/18/2005 7:43 AM
Hi Jay,
On 7/18/2005 Jay Walker wrote:
JW> I would definitely have opted out of that cycle.
Opportunity is knocking! Seize it!
--
Take Care,
Paul
The Bat! v.3.0.2.10 on Win2k SP4-Rollup1 5.0.2195
Current beta is
--On 6 July 2005 14:26:07 -0500 Allie Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You were the one making the semantic comment. I have to counter it
with similar semantic commentary.
There you go see. If you was to use a Mac you wouldn't need a virus scanner
at all.
--
Tony.
i.
_
On 7/6/05, Allie Martin wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 02:15 PM, Avi Yashar wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Allie, but I just don't follow why you
> > are so dogmatic on this point.
>
> BTW, where did this come from??
>
> You were the one making the semantic comment. I have to counter it
> with si
On 7/6/05, Allie Martin wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 02:15 PM, Avi Yashar wrote:
>
> > Again, Allie, that is not entirely true. 3.5.0.31 does not
> > mathematically follow 3.5.30.
>
> That's a famous mistake that was admitted as such. This is why I said,
> barring the typos and admitt
On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 02:15 PM, Avi Yashar wrote:
> Sorry, Allie, but I just don't follow why you
> are so dogmatic on this point.
BTW, where did this come from??
You were the one making the semantic comment. I have to counter it
with similar semantic commentary.
--
-= Allie M.=-
Usi
On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 02:15 PM, Avi Yashar wrote:
> Again, Allie, that is not entirely true. 3.5.0.31 does not
> mathematically follow 3.5.30.
That's a famous mistake that was admitted as such. This is why I said,
barring the typos and admitted errors, TB!'s versioning has followed a
ma
--On 6 July 2005 13:53:26 -0500 Allie Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Your problems certainly make for food for thought. The question is how
to debug the problem. Your debug logs are likely where the questions
will be answered.
Well 9Val has had them for the past month. He might still be c
On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 01:14 PM, Tony Boom wrote:
> I've given up on it now totally. It works but it's just *so much
> effort* trying to keep on top of it, keeping up with it and trying
> to understand what it's doing is just too tiring. It's now telling
> me half my mailboxes don't exist
On 7/6/05, Allie Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 09:18 AM, Avi Yashar wrote:
>
> > But what happens when you reach 3.9? Does that mean that you cannot
> > have any more major updates of the 3.x release? Does that mean that
> > RL is obliged to come out with the
--On 6 July 2005 12:47:57 -0400 Vili <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
User clicks on a mail, download it. Dont use the local cache...
Problem solved.
Here, here. I think they should ditch the spooling method as well, I think
that's where most of the problem lies, but then again, who am I t
On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 09:18 AM, Avi Yashar wrote:
> But what happens when you reach 3.9? Does that mean that you cannot
> have any more major updates of the 3.x release? Does that mean that
> RL is obliged to come out with the 4.x series? The answer is no. 3.9
> can be followed by 3.10 a
Hello Gleason,
>> Account, Properties, Mail management, When inactive, disconnect after
>> this time: uncheck, and Account, Properties, Mail management,
>> Automatically connect to server: When account is selected, checked.
>> This way you will be fine.
> My settings have always been
13 matches
Mail list logo
