Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen <at> xemacs.org> writes: > > If > you see a broken encoding once, you're likely to see it a million times > (spammers have the most broken software) or maybe have it raise an > unhandled Exception a dozen times (in rate of using busted software, > the spammers are closely followed by bosses---which would be very bad, > eh, if you 2/3 of the mail from your boss ends up in an undeliverables > queue due to encoding errors that are unhandled by your some filter in > your mail pipeline).
I'm not sure how mail being stuck in a pipeline has anything to do with Martin's proposal (which deals with file paths, not with SMTP...). Besides, I don't care about spammers and their broken software. > Again, that's not the point. The point is that six-sigma reliability > world-wide is not going to be very comforting to the poor souls who > happen to have broken software in their environment sending broken > encodings regularly, because they're going to be dealing with one or > two sigmas, and that's just not good enough in a production > environment. So you're arguing that whatever solution which isn't 100% perfect but only 99.999% perfect shouldn't be implemented at all, and leave the status quo at 98%? This sounds disturbing to me. (especially given you probably sent this mail using TCP/IP...) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
