On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 19:49 +0200, Job 317 wrote: > Again, I am unsure of your source of agitation. I am making comparrisons > between e-mail clients and it is a useful feature that come clients have > chosen to implement. I like Evolution a lot. Actually, it is my favorite > client for Linux and my desire is to see it blow everyone else away with > its features. > > I might even be persuaded to assist in the development of the requested > features. I simply wasn't sure whether the features were currently being > developed. This was the original nature of my post -- whether these > features are being planned or not.
In 2004, the vast majority of bounce messages are *not* sent to the spammers who sent the message in the 1st place. Thus, you are making the situation *worse* by bouncing spam. Thus, the Evo developers think "Bounce Mail" is a mal-feature, and won't put it in. Regarding in-line PGP, the developers are tired of answering the same question that has been asked twice a week since forever. > On 21-May-2004 19:31:08 +0200, you wrote: > > oh, and just because "kmail has it" doesn't make it a good idea. in > > fact, it is probably a good reason NOT to have it (I think a lot of > the > > kmail features are crack). > > > > Jeff > > > > On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 13:28 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 19:08 +0200, Job 317 wrote: > > > > On 21-May-2004 17:57:20 +0200, you wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 16:52, Job 317 wrote: > > > > > > Where can I find information about future releases and > feature > > > > additions > > > > > > for Evolution? > > > > > > > > > > > > Specifically, I am interested in knowing when the next major > release > > > > of > > > > > > Evolution is due. > > > > > > > > > > 2.0: Q3 > > > > > > > > Great. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Third, I would like a Bounce option for SPAM. Is this > available? If > > > > not, > > > > > > will it be? > > > > > > > > > > Why would you want to bounce SPAM? > > > > > > > > Admitedly, a lot of SPAMers these days don't care whether the > target is > > > > active or not and don't check. They will likely spoof the source > address > > > > anyway. However, it is a nice feature to make the spammer think > that > > > > your e-mail address does not exist. Also, other mail clients > (e.g. > > > > KMail) do currently support this feature. > > > > > > this is a totally wasteful feature to have. it does nothing but > kill > > > more bandwidth and create even more amounts of spam. What if the > > > original spammer spoofs someone's email address and you hit bounce? > > > well, now *that* user gets hit with extra spam... creating a world > of > > > even more pain and suffering. Besides, do you *really* think they > pay > > > attention to what addresses bounce? hell no, it's not economical to > do > > > so. > > > > > > it's better to just leave the spam be and get on with your life. > don't > > > contribute to the problem. > > > > > > > > > > > Any comment on the PGP-inline feature that I mentioned in my > original > > > > post? > > > > > > have you coded it yet? > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > -- > > Jeffrey Stedfast > > Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com > > > > -- Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
