Re: hey

2003-07-28 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 01:07:46PM +0200, Xavier Roche wrote: > It might be a good idea to reject MIME messages in -devel? Do we need > attachments? (patchs can be inserted in the message body) Even the BTS understands attachments now. I wouldn't be a fan of rejecting them from -devel. In particul

Re: hey

2003-07-28 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Re: hey [Xavier Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 01:07:46PM +0200, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > It might be a good idea to reject MIME messages in -devel? Do we need > attachments? (patchs can be inserted in the message body) /me would miss his gpg si

Re: hey

2003-07-28 Thread Arnaud Vandyck
Xavier Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It might be a good idea to reject MIME messages in -devel? Do we need > attachments? (patchs can be inserted in the message body) pgp signature *should* be attached -- Arnaud Vandyck http://alioth.debian.org/users/arnaud-guest/ pgp6Q8YBVPiDi.pgp Des

Re: hey

2003-07-28 Thread Matthew Palmer
[It might also be a good idea to wrap your postings] On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 01:07:46PM +0200, Xavier Roche wrote: > It might be a good idea to reject MIME messages in -devel? Do we need > attachments? (patchs can be inserted in the message body) GPG/MIME is nice. And attached patches make thing

Re: hey

2003-07-28 Thread Xavier Roche
It might be a good idea to reject MIME messages in -devel? Do we need attachments? (patchs can be inserted in the message body)

Re: Hey, Y'all, check out my new improved "Free Software Research Paper Project" web site!

1999-05-17 Thread R. Brock Lynn
Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > > "brock" == R Brock Lynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > brock> And you really can't argue with a FEELING. > > Oh -- well, I guess not. In fact, that kinda points out that there's > no really reason for carrying on any further debate. Well the debate may end, but

Re: Hey, Y'all, check out my new improved "Free Software Research Paper Project" web site!

1999-05-17 Thread Adam Di Carlo
> "brock" == R Brock Lynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: brock> And you really can't argue with a FEELING. Oh -- well, I guess not. In fact, that kinda points out that there's no really reason for carrying on any further debate. brock> Yes, I don't doubt you have much experience... but only in

Re: Hey, Y'all, check out my new improved "Free Software Research Paper Project" web site!

1999-05-17 Thread R. Brock Lynn
Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > "R. Brock Lynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > > > * stressing sharing vs hoarding as the fundamental issue is > > > reductionistic; it flattens other problems and issues, such as > > > economic issues, social issues, etc. > > > Sur