Shouldn't we be doing this in a GitHub PR rather than spamming up the ML?
Not really. BIP changes should be discussed on the mailing list,
that's the way to get community consensus (as specified in BIP1).
Wladimir
--
On Thursday, October 16, 2014 6:22:04 AM Wladimir wrote:
Shouldn't we be doing this in a GitHub PR rather than spamming up the ML?
Not really. BIP changes should be discussed on the mailing list,
that's the way to get community consensus (as specified in BIP1).
Wladimir
Discussion vs
On Wednesday 15. October 2014 11.36.58 Wladimir wrote:
We're also having problems with people failing to comment on things,
not even I looked at this and have no opinion, which is really
obstructing things.
Well - the only way to avoid that is to set a reasonable deadline,
after which
On Wednesday 15. October 2014 20.13.11 Mike Hearn wrote:
Plus its moderation features suck, its mail archiving features suck, etc.
It essentially has no redeeming features at all.
Other than it being open source, an open platform with no lock-in 'features'
and it works with everyone that uses
15.10.2014 at 20:13 Mike Hearn wrote:
For a project that is based on digital signatures, it's really
bad that the mailing list is incompatible with Yahoo's mail signatures
must be valid policy.
# Mailman: Do not break existing DKIM signatures
DEFAULT_SUBJECT_PREFIX =
DEFAULT_MSG_HEADER =
5 matches
Mail list logo