Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-11-30 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi, I didn't move about that (and actually I won't as we don't have a consensus). Let me check with INFRA if they changed policy about HTML messages. Regards JB On 30/11/2019 13:17, Steinar Bang wrote: >> Steinar Bang : > >>> Do you agree about allowing HTML emails on the mailing lists ?

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-11-30 Thread Steinar Bang
> Steinar Bang : >> Do you agree about allowing HTML emails on the mailing lists ? > (-0.5 I rather you didn't but I don't have a strong objection) HTML in posted message is broken in the mailing list archives:

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-10-21 Thread Steinar Bang
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré : > Do you agree about allowing HTML emails on the mailing lists ? (-0.5 I rather you didn't but I don't have a strong objection)

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-10-21 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
The feedback that I got from some users is that they can't post to the mailing list with Gmail client on Android (it seems that Gmail forces text/html). INFRA already changed the policy for direct recipient, but mailing list is configured on ezmlm. So, it's for some specific clients actually.

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-10-21 Thread Julian Feinauer
Hi, although I generally have no objects (I dont care, in fact) I do not see a direct need for it. Many projects operate for tens of years like that and opening up html could leed to other issues (blocked embedded images... ). So what did they want to do that doesn’t work in plain OR jira?

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept HTML on the Apache Karaf mailing lists

2019-10-21 Thread Francois Papon
Hi, No objection from me :) regards, François fpa...@apache.org Le 20/10/2019 à 20:50, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > Hi, > > I've discussed with INFRA to authorize HTML emails on the mailing lists. > > I would like to bring this discussion here to see if we all agree about > that. > > I