On 16 May 2016 at 11:52, Anders Roxell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2016-05-16 08:27, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > > > > > From: lng-odp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Bill Fischofer > > Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 1:55 AM > > To: Brian Brooks <[email protected]> > > Cc: lng-odp <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [lng-odp] lng-odp mailman settings > > > > > > > > On Friday, May 13, 2016, Brian Brooks <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > On 05/13 10:07:44, Bill Fischofer wrote: > > > I don't think we need to impose those sort of restrictions. I > personally > > > use sylpheed for patches and GMail for everything else and they have no > > > problem sorting things out. > > > > > > The ODP mailing list covers both discussions as well as patches, and > HTML > > > is useful for the former. The onus should be on those who have problems > > > with this to upgrade their tools rather than sending everyone else > back to > > > the 1980s. > > > > > > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Mike Holmes > > > <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > > > > All, > > > > > > > > A topic that comes up occasionally that affects some mail tools like > > > > outlook is that html email on this list makes it harder for some > folks to > > > > process patches. > > > > > > > > I use mutt specifically to avoid using a fancy email client for all > my > > > > patch download/send work, it is powered by coal/steam and would work > fine > > > > on a 1970 VAX but there you go. > > > > > > > > Anyway, does anyone object to having mailman reject HTML mail ? One > up > > > > side is that I will not waste time blocking offers of cheap watches > and fax > > > > services from the list :) > > > > > > > > On the other hand I will miss bullet lists and the color red when I > am > > > > grumpy. > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > +1 for plain text > > > > I think this topic is more about simplicity and best practices rather > than > > anything else. > > > > Here is an example of why HTML doesn't work well with archives: > > https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/lng-odp/2016-May/023134.html > > That link displays perfectly fine for me. What problem do you see? > > > > Did you read it? It’s a mixture of paragraphs from two writers, without > any indication who is writing what. The list archive drops out HTML > decoration and at least in some cases will not convert (various blue or > grey lines, or indentations) into ‘>’. > > > > As Brian highlights, it’s about simplicity. With one rule (no HTML) we > can uniform output of all mail clients and their fonts/indentations/other > settings, so that the list is clean and clear to read (both directly and > from the archives) and reply (no need to struggle with mismatching styles > inherited from the senders HTML settings, etc). > > > > +1 for plain text > > I agree with Brian and Petri. > There shouldn't be any other option than plain text! > Is that an option then that I can choose not to choose? > That works for discussions as well. "You can mail all those funny mails > to your friends." =) > But can you send all those funny emails to your pets? I mean, if you don't have friends? > > Just a reflection, since we talking about plain text vs. html... Is > there someone that can follow this thread easily? =) > > We have another problem with this thread as well, people top-post, > which is insane! =) > How does forbidding HTML prevent top-posting? Perhaps we should filter out top-posts as well? And why stop at that? > > Cheers, > Anders > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
