[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#3253: Pine base64 bug

> > > Excuse me?  Are you seriously trying to claim that using a mailer
> > > which isn't MIME-aware is broken?
> >
> > No, I'm saying that pine is no more broken than non-MIME mailers.
> Que? Non-MIME mailers don't uselessly over-encode plain text files.

Non-MIME mailers don't add "attachments".

> > > > Not every (bug|feature request) have to be on the bug tracking
> > > > system.
> > >
> > > Uhh, why not?  Surely that is what it's there for?
> >
> > We are currently using it for feature requests, so we are really
> > making a bad use of it. But since we don't have a "wish tracking
> > system" yet, this procedure is better than nothing.
> Only the people who want to close this bug consider it a feature
> request.

No, only those who don't want to fight against the upstream authors directly
fight to let the maintainer to their dirty work for them.

> > This "bug" has reached its "final" state: the bug is dead. So there
> > is nothing more to "track".
> How do you know that someone won't fix this at some time in the
> future?  You _don't_ (again #988).  So leave the bug open.

If it were a bug, I'd agree with you.  Since it's not (it behaves exactly
as documented), we don't _have_ to track it.

                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )

     I am Pentium of Borg.  Division is futile.  You will be approximated.

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: