Re: Bug#3253: Pine base64 bug
> > > > 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".
>
> So? How does that make uselessly over-encoding a plain text file
> right?
It makes in unnecessary. It doesn't make it _wrong_.
> > 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.
>
> I can't believe you are seriously trying to claim that anything
> documented is not a bug, I refer you once again to the hypothetical
> example of a documented alias ls='rm -fr', is that not a bug?
I believe that you'll find the documentation of 'ls' to be a little
different that what you'd like to do. I suppose you'll claim that you
could just rewrite the 'ls' man page, but 'ls' is documented a little
more completely than that.
A documented unintended behavior is a bug. Documented intended behavior
is not, regardless of whether the behavior is what you personally would
like or not.
Brian
( bcwhite@verisim.com )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to my calculations, that problem doesn't exist.
--
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: