Eric Garff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Green wrote:
> >
> > Further, Mr. Cazabon did NOT treat anyone ``like an idiot''. He *did* say,
> > basically, RTFM even while pointing out the exact FM. What exactly would you
> > have him do, reproduce the documentation for the mailing list everytime the
> > question comes up? That's why there is documentation at all!
> I feel that he did treat him like an idiot with the blatant statement "It's
> documented, so it must be true.", it's a statement of "Haha, a opportunity to
> be snide".
In my original mail, my (slightly snide) comment about "it's documented, and
therefore true" was intended to be humourous, not demeaning. Regardless of how
it came across, it was followed immediately by:
> Read any of the numerous qmail FAQs, or the man page for dot-qmail. Pay
> particular attention to the "Extension Addresses" section.
So I pointed him to the precise section of the particular manpage which
documented the behaviour he was asking about. I thought that was about as
useful an answer as he could have received; after all, he might forget the
specifics of how qmail-local handled extension addresses, but he might be
able to remember that they were documented in the dot-qmail manpage.
Charles
P.S. Thank you to Mr. Green for the support.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
