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

Re: Reply To settings - was - Re: Debian 7.5 amd64 xfce GUI shutdown and restart do not work



Bret Busby wrote:
> Tom H wrote:
> > Bret Busby wrote:
> >> Bob Proulx wrote:
> >>> This is one of those religious wars that has been fought and won and
> >>> lost many times across the Internet. Please don't start it up again
> >>> here. If you do really want to do so please use the off-topic mailing
> >>> list d-community-offtopic@lists.alioth.debian.org since the issue has
> >>> nothing to do with using Debian.
> >>
> >> Given what has already hapened within the thread, the above
> >> message to which I am responding, appears to be a troll.
> >
> > Requesting that you take a religious-type discussion (like a list's
> > "Reply To" settings) to the OT list isn't trolling!
> 
> If either you or he, had read what had aleardy passed in the thread,
> you and he would have seen that the matter had been dealt with,

I had read through the thread.  For reference it starts here:

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/06/msg01192.html

And it was that message to which I replied.  "wes" kindly pointed to a
different thread of discussion which clarified things somewhat.
However that was a different thread and I had skipped over reading it.

> resulting in my making a request for change, to the people maintaining
> PINE/ALPINE, to allow the option of replying to a list, using the
> List-Post field value in message headers, which solution had been
> included in the previous postings in the thread.

Sorry but it was not clear to me in the thread that you were making an
enhancement request for the alpine package.

As a suggestion I doubt the alpine package maintainers are reading
this mailing list.  I haven't seen the maintainer's address here, that
I have noticed.  It it much better for enhancement requests if a
wishlist bug is filed against the package in the BTS.  That will get
the attention of the maintainer.  But unless someone actually steps
forward and does the work it still probably won't get done.  But at
least the effort will be documented in an easier to locate place.

Most work for enhancing is better done directly with the upstream
maintainers.  It is controversial how many patches should be
maintained downstream in Debian.  Some think many.  Some think none.
Many upstreams become upset if their software is modified.  Some
welcome it.  Therefore I think it is best to try to work with the
upstream project directly when possible to develop new features.

> I had not previously been aware of RFC2369, and so, the thread, with
> its responses before the trolls, had been constructive and
> educational, which, I believe is supposed to be the purpose of this
> mailing list.
> 
> Gmail appears to not have provision for making Requests For Change,
> regarding the Gmail email facility, so I appear to not be able to make
> a Request For Change, to the Gmail people, which could solve the
> problem in using Gmail..

Google is rather notorious for being hard to reach on such things.

> I had posted what I had posted, regarding the abillity to reply to the
> list, solution had been posted and demonstrated, and, the matter had
> (I believe) been closed, insofar as the thread on this list, had been
> concerned.
> 
> The subsequent messages posted by
> <bob@proulx.com>
> <tomh0665@gmail.com>
> <lazyvirus@gmx.com>
> were inflammatory, and, posted for the purpose of being inflammatory,
> making them trolls.

Two of those three certainly were not.  But somehow I think we are
using different definitions for an internet troll.  A troll is almost
always trying to increase noise in a newsgroup or mailing list by
stirring up trouble.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

The messages you are marking as trolling are trying to reduce noise on
this mailing list.  Because discussions of reply-to have historically
been very controversial topics.  We have been there many times.

> The thread had come to an end; it had the solution, and, the thread
> had died, and those people revived it, to create a zombie for evil
> purposes.

Let me formally apologize if I misunderstood your message.  My mistake
was reading your message and thinking you were asking for a
controversial change to the mailing list.  If past history is a
prediction that would have started a discussion hundreds of messages
long.  If I had understood that you were asking for an enhancement
request for a package I wouldn't have commented as I did.  Therefore
let me say that I am sorry if I offended you.  I am also sorry if I
extended a discussion that had concluded.  No evil was intended.

Please be careful directly calling people trolls however.  We try to
be a pleasant and welcoming place here on the mailing list.  But ad
hominem attacks never go well for anyone.  My advice is to avoid using
that perjorative directly against people.  It is too easy to take it
personally since personally is how it is directed.  Therefore my best
advice is to avoid it.  :-)

Bob

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: