Re: The latest round of antivirus bouncebacks
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:41:45 +0200, Mikael Bergman wrote:
>On 11-04-02 00:45 , Gary Turner wrote:
>
>> I have no problem with attachments. In many cases, where a file is
>> long, attachments are preferred. I often have neither the
>> qualifications nor interest needed to enjoy wading through pages of this
>> script or that configuration. I do often benefit from the commentary
>> and queries though. If I do want to see it, opening is trivial.
>
>I agree - for private mails! I can't imagine a situation where an
>attachment is warranted on a (debian) list.
Mikael,
Attachments are especially appropriate on a busy list such as this one.
No posting is of interest to everyone. Long files inlined in the
message make it difficult to scan for the meat of the post. Consider
the subject of this thread. How instructive is it? Or, do you have to
do a quick read of the message?
Secondly, an attachment can be easily saved without a bunch of cut and
paste and opening editors, etc.. I find this very helpful for scripts
of any length that I might want to play with on my own box. Should I
wish to look at the file, ^R will inline it as raw text.
IMO any file exceeding 25 lines should be considered for attachment. A
file >50 lines should definitely be attached rather than inlined.
Lists are not exactly trusted sources for binaries. (Hell, I don't
trust my mother's binary attachments ;-}.) How many of those are posted
here anyway?
--
gt
Yes I fear I am living beyond my mental means--Nash
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: