On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 11:59:09AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Why not? Changing bloody stupid defaults is something that's entirely
> within the remit of the packager.
With good reason. Turning of a very nice feature because s/he PERSONALLY
doesn't like it for absolutely no good reason is not and should not be
acceptable.
> The default behaviour of Mailman is something that I find indescribably
> frustrating, and the number of people I know who wish everyone "Happy
> Mailman day" (and not in a good way) is large.
Let me get this straight. You're pissed off about *ONE* email a month per
list subscribed to? One? Just one? That's it? And not only is it just one
but it is one that is *EASILY FILTERABLE*!!! I just want to be asolutely
clear on that. You're pissed off about one easily filterable message per
month. Which, I might add, represents a very nice automatic way of culling
bad addresses so the list(s) you're subscribed to are more effcient, run
faster and have fewer problems. That about sum it up?
> Packages that provide services to users should default to settings that make
> the user experience pleasant.
I fail to see how a default which helps greatly in the effciency and
maintainability of the list at the "expense" of one message a month is
anything but making the user experience plesant.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature