Re: Message size limit

[Andrew Bernard]

It was a joke.

Andrew


On 6/03/2023 12:43 am, David Kastrup wrote:
I don't really see how "schadenfreude" scales to the problem space. 

Re: Message size limit

[David Kastrup]

Andrew Bernard  writes:

> Hello All,
>
> I can't help feeling a twinge of schadenfreude on hearing this. :-)
>
> Although one can impose such restrictions in Discourse, you don't have
> to unless you are constrained by organisational problems as here with
> GNU.

Do you really think that the number of mailing lists supported by the
GNU mailing list server could be supported on the same hardware by the
same number of Discourse forums?

I don't really see how "schadenfreude" scales to the problem space.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Message size limit

[Mark Knoop]

At 15:28 on 05 Mar 2023, Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Hello All,

> I can't help feeling a twinge of schadenfreude on hearing this. :-)

> Although one can impose such restrictions in Discourse, you don't have
> to unless you are constrained by organisational problems as here with
> GNU. As to my suggestion about implementing Discourse, I'd be
> proposing running it on a dedicated linux server at one of the hosting
> providers, well clear of GNU infrastructure and limitations. Discourse
> also handles attachments and images very well, both in the web
> interface and in the email interface, no problems, and you can set
> maximum size allowed with ease to whatever your system can handle in
> terms of disk space.

Whilst the discussion regarding Discourse emerged from a general thread
about the mailing list infrastructure, I think it's unfair to score this
as a point against the current Mailman/GNU setup.

We are currently benefiting from the GNU project's provision of disk
space and bandwidth for the mailing lists - and indeed have "set maximum
size allowed with ease" on this occasion to avoid wasting that
provision.

As you say in your next email regarding Discourse, that itself would
rely on user donations to fund it - it seems likely that a similar
maximum size limit would be set.

--
Mark Knoop

Re: Message size limit

[Andrew Bernard]

With links to external file sharing services, the mbox archives no 
longer contain the complete message and it is a given that internet file 
sharing sites are impermanent, so there is potential here to lose 
information, and people tell me the archive is important to them.


Andrew


On 5/03/2023 12:29 am, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message 
size of 512KB. If you send a message larger than this, it will come 
back to you after a while, with a reminder that you should trim its 
size. If you need to send a file larger than the limit, please use a 
file sharing service and send the URL only.

Re: Message size limit

[Andrew Bernard]

Hello All,

I can't help feeling a twinge of schadenfreude on hearing this. :-)

Although one can impose such restrictions in Discourse, you don't have 
to unless you are constrained by organisational problems as here with 
GNU. As to my suggestion about implementing Discourse, I'd be proposing 
running it on a dedicated linux server at one of the hosting providers, 
well clear of GNU infrastructure and limitations. Discourse also handles 
attachments and images very well, both in the web interface and in the 
email interface, no problems, and you can set maximum size allowed with 
ease to whatever your system can handle in terms of disk space.


See my next separate post about current status with this side project re 
Discourse.


Andrew


On 5/03/2023 12:29 am, Jean Abou Samra wrote:


We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing 
large attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's 
mail delivery queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this 
list, but for everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).


To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message 
size of 512KB. If you send a message larger than this, it will come 
back to you after a while, with a reminder that you should trim its 
size. If you need to send a file larger than the limit, please use a 
file sharing service and send the URL only.

Re: Message size limit

[David Wright]

On Sat 04 Mar 2023 at 13:02:13 (-0800), Saul Tobin wrote:
> Hard disagree on plain text emails.
> 
> I didn't really have a strong opinion re the whole discussion about message
> boards vs. email, but IMO the world has moved on to rich text email with
> embedded media. I think the reliance on plain text email as the standard
> for this mailing list detracts significantly from the conversation.
> Inlining images makes it much easier to communicate typesetting questions
> and also much easier to quickly respond, especially when viewing messages
> on a cell phone.
> 
> Rich text emails with embedded media should IMO be supported as first class
> citizens of the mailing list.

I'm not sure what you mean by rich text email. I can only find RTF,
about which MS writes:

 "Rich Text Format

   "Important: HTML format is the current default compose format in
Outlook. RTF is a legacy format and we do not plan to bring
improvements to it. In this sense, use of RTF in encrypted
messages is not recommended and it will be prone to face
conversion issues.

 "Rich Text Format (RTF) is a Microsoft format that’s supported only
  by these email applications: 

Microsoft Exchange Client versions 4.0 and 5.0
All versions of Outlook"

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/change-the-message-format-to-html-rich-text-format-or-plain-text-338a389d-11da-47fe-b693-cf41f792fefa

Or do you mean HTML, which is tolerable when MUAs remember
to include the plain text version with appropriate headers.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Message size limit

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 22:40 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
> If you are attaching a code file, you probably have some idea of its  
> size, without checking.  Maybe it involved your time and effort.
> 
> But screenshots are easy to create and their huge size may not be  
> immediately obvious.  A lot of LilyPond people might be thankful for  
> friendly tips on coping with their oversize cases.

For a start, you may not need a screenshot in the first place. While this is 
not very common on LilyPond lists (but it is the case in the first thread your 
mention), it may worth repeating that code or logs should not be posted as 
screenshots, but simply inline in the email; not only does it trim down the 
size, but it also allows the reader to copy-paste.

Next, if a screenshot is genuinely useful, then cropping might help, as Frank 
noted. In most cases, I would expect that you can easily get below the limit 
even on high-res monitors by not capturing a too large area.

If that doesn't suffice, use a file sharing service like Nextcloud / Dropbox / 
Google drive.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Message size limit

[Robin Bannister]

Jean Abou Samra wrote:

Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :



Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?


Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from other kinds of 
attachments?


If you are attaching a code file, you probably have some idea of its 
size, without checking.  Maybe it involved your time and effort.


But screenshots are easy to create and their huge size may not be 
immediately obvious.  A lot of LilyPond people might be thankful for 
friendly tips on coping with their oversize cases.





Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.


What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages in the list 
archives for September 2021.



The average mbox size is around 10MB; that one is 75MB.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2021-09/msg00013.html
This thread has .png of around 100KB, 8 instances original and 8 quoted.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2021-09/msg00147.html
This thread has one original .jpg instance of nearly 6MB (+ apology).
The 6 quoted instances bring this short thread up to ca. 40MB.


Cheers,
Robin

Re: Message size limit

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 13:02 -0800, Saul Tobin a écrit :
> Hard disagree on plain text emails.
> 
> I didn't really have a strong opinion re the whole discussion about message 
> boards vs. email, but IMO the world has moved on to rich text email with 
> embedded media. I think the reliance on plain text email as the standard for 
> this mailing list detracts significantly from the conversation. Inlining 
> images makes it much easier to communicate typesetting questions and also 
> much easier to quickly respond, especially when viewing messages on a cell 
> phone.
> 
> Rich text emails with embedded media should IMO be supported as first class 
> citizens of the mailing list.

The list doesn't "support" or "not support" rich text or plain text email; mail 
clients do. The only thing that needs support for rich text emails on the list 
side is the list archives, and I never saw problems with HTML emails there. 
Inline images remain viewable inline 
([example](https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2023-03/msg00050.html)).

So there is really little to be discussed about this; it's a personal choice of 
each person to send plain text or HTML emails in their daily communication, and 
you're unlikely to change their preferences.

(Speaking for myself, I switched to HTML emails some time ago to look less 
freaky in non-technical contexts, but I cheat: I compose my email in Markdown, 
so I can still write as plain text :-)



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Message size limit

[Kenneth Wolcott]

Hard disagree on rich text :-)

Rich text and other kinds of formatting issues all occur when there is
no formatting standard required to be met.  Having everyone use
exactly the same formatting rules would be overly burdensome.  Getting
everyone to agree to a set of formatting rules would be nearly
impossible.  When person A uses a formatting style best suited to
them, person B may have extreme difficulty understanding what is being
expressed when their formatting style is significantly different.
Some people really do not like having a rich text environment forced
on them (perhaps the person is using a text-based interface,
text-based email app, text-based editor, etc).

  What I think is best if the specific desired formatting of the crux
of the issue (not the entire email content) is best placed in an
attachment, just like pdf, png, jpeg, gif, etc files.

  Well, that's my two cents on the issue :-)

Thanks,
Ken Wolcott

On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 1:03 PM Saul Tobin  wrote:
>
> Hard disagree on plain text emails.
>
> I didn't really have a strong opinion re the whole discussion about message 
> boards vs. email, but IMO the world has moved on to rich text email with 
> embedded media. I think the reliance on plain text email as the standard for 
> this mailing list detracts significantly from the conversation. Inlining 
> images makes it much easier to communicate typesetting questions and also 
> much easier to quickly respond, especially when viewing messages on a cell 
> phone.
>
> Rich text emails with embedded media should IMO be supported as first class 
> citizens of the mailing list.
>
> Saul
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 12:18 PM Valentin Petzel  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jean,
>>
>> I think Robin is talking about embedded images that are quoted on reply,
>> resulting in the same attachment being sent back and forth over and over
>> again.
>>
>> Of course this does not matter when you send plain text emails, which should
>> be the sensible choice ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Valentin
>>
>> Am Samstag, 4. März 2023, 16:53:11 CET schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
>> > Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
>> > > Jean Abou Samra wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing
>> > > > large attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's
>> > > > mail delivery queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this
>> > > > list, but for everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).
>> > > >
>> > > > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message
>> > > > size of 512KB.>
>> > > Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?
>> >
>> > Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from other kinds
>> > of attachments?
>> > > Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.
>> >
>> > What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages in the list
>> > archives for September 2021.
>>

Re: Message size limit

[William Rehwinkel]

The difference between plain and rich text emails is not related to the 
question of size limits, as even the most rich HTML email still has 
negligible size compared to emails with attachments. As for whether 
embedded attachments should get included in replies, in my opinion they 
should not, for the purpose of minimizing the amount of storage space 
used. However, as long as the maximum email size is reasonably small it 
shouldn't be that big of a deal if a reply including attachments goes 
through.


I like the idea of the email size limit, and IMO a smaller limit would 
also be fine, perhaps 128KB.


-William

On 3/4/23 16:02, Saul Tobin wrote:

Hard disagree on plain text emails.

I didn't really have a strong opinion re the whole discussion about 
message boards vs. email, but IMO the world has moved on to rich text 
email with embedded media. I think the reliance on plain text email as 
the standard for this mailing list detracts significantly from the 
conversation. Inlining images makes it much easier to communicate 
typesetting questions and also much easier to quickly respond, 
especially when viewing messages on a cell phone.


Rich text emails with embedded media should IMO be supported as first 
class citizens of the mailing list.


Saul


On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 12:18 PM Valentin Petzel > wrote:


Hi Jean,

I think Robin is talking about embedded images that are quoted on
reply,
resulting in the same attachment being sent back and forth over and
over
again.

Of course this does not matter when you send plain text emails,
which should
be the sensible choice ...

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Samstag, 4. März 2023, 16:53:11 CET schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
 > Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
 > > Jean Abou Samra wrote:
 > > > Hi,
 > > >
 > > > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list
containing
 > > > large attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list
server's
 > > > mail delivery queue, causing distribution delays (not just
for this
 > > > list, but for everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org
 lists).
 > > >
 > > > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a
max message
 > > > size of 512KB.>
 > > Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?
 >
 > Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from
other kinds
 > of attachments?
 > > Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.
 >
 > What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages
in the list
 > archives for September 2021.



--
+ -- +
|William Rehwinkel - Oberlin College and |
|   Conservatory '24 |
|  will...@williamrehwinkel.net  |
| PGP key:   |
| https://williamrehwinkel.net/static/pubkey.txt |
+ -- +


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Message size limit

[Saul Tobin]

Hard disagree on plain text emails.

I didn't really have a strong opinion re the whole discussion about message
boards vs. email, but IMO the world has moved on to rich text email with
embedded media. I think the reliance on plain text email as the standard
for this mailing list detracts significantly from the conversation.
Inlining images makes it much easier to communicate typesetting questions
and also much easier to quickly respond, especially when viewing messages
on a cell phone.

Rich text emails with embedded media should IMO be supported as first class
citizens of the mailing list.

Saul


On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 12:18 PM Valentin Petzel  wrote:

> Hi Jean,
>
> I think Robin is talking about embedded images that are quoted on reply,
> resulting in the same attachment being sent back and forth over and over
> again.
>
> Of course this does not matter when you send plain text emails, which
> should
> be the sensible choice ...
>
> Cheers,
> Valentin
>
> Am Samstag, 4. März 2023, 16:53:11 CET schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> > Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
> > > Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing
> > > > large attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's
> > > > mail delivery queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this
> > > > list, but for everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).
> > > >
> > > > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max
> message
> > > > size of 512KB.>
> > > Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?
> >
> > Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from other
> kinds
> > of attachments?
> > > Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.
> >
> > What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages in the
> list
> > archives for September 2021.
>
>

Re: Message size limit

[Valentin Petzel]

Hi Jean,

I think Robin is talking about embedded images that are quoted on reply, 
resulting in the same attachment being sent back and forth over and over 
again.

Of course this does not matter when you send plain text emails, which should 
be the sensible choice ...

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Samstag, 4. März 2023, 16:53:11 CET schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
> > Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing
> > > large attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's
> > > mail delivery queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this
> > > list, but for everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).
> > > 
> > > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message
> > > size of 512KB.> 
> > Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?
> 
> Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from other kinds
> of attachments?
> > Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.
> 
> What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages in the list
> archives for September 2021.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Message size limit

[Frank Steinmetzger]

Am Sat, Mar 04, 2023 at 04:45:07PM +0100 schrieb Robin Bannister:
> Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing large 
> > attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's mail delivery 
> > queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this list, but for 
> > everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).
> > 
> > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message
> > size of 512KB.

> Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?

Crop, use the proper format¹, and optimise prior to sending. Depending on 
how (with which tool) the screenshot was made, there is lots of room for 
reducing the filesize. For that, use `optipng -o9 `. It will 
reduce the PNG colour palette and apply stronger compression settings, but 
is still lossless.

For small and medium images, PNG is of course the best option. But if a 
larger area needs to be pictued which exceeds the permitted file size, JPG 
is still good enough. It may introduce artifacts, but compresses much higher 
and the relevant info is still visible.

> Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.

Hm… this is an issue on the user’s side, specifically the used mail client. 
If you notice this in your own messages, select some text before opening the 
reply. The mailer will usually only quote the selected content.

> Cheers,
> Robin
> 

-- 
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

“So the Americans are worried about having autistic Englishmen hacking into
the Pentagon Computer, but they are seriously considering Mitt Romney having
control of the Button.”
– Jeremy Hardy about the extradition of the UFO hacker, BBC News Quiz.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Message size limit

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le samedi 04 mars 2023 à 16:45 +0100, Robin Bannister a écrit :
> Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing large 
> > attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's mail delivery 
> > queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this list, but for 
> > everyone on the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).
> > 
> > To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message size 
> > of 512KB.
> 
> 
> Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?

Not sure I understand the question. Why would they differ from other kinds of 
attachments?

> Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.

What are you referring to precisely? There are lots of messages in the list 
archives for September 2021.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Message size limit

[Robin Bannister]

Jean Abou Samra wrote:

Hi,

We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing large 
attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's mail delivery 
queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this list, but for everyone on 
the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).

To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message size of 512KB. 


Is there any specific advice for users taking screenshots?

Especially inline ones: those get copied when quoted, cf 2021-09.


Cheers,
Robin

Message size limit

[Jean Abou Samra]

Hi,

We've been informed that the size of messages to this list containing large 
attachments is occasionally clogging up the GNU list server's mail delivery 
queue, causing distribution delays (not just for this list, but for everyone on 
the hundreds of other gnu.org lists).

To avoid this, your friendly list admins have configured a max message size of 
512KB. If you send a message larger than this, it will come back to you after a 
while, with a reminder that you should trim its size. If you need to send a 
file larger than the limit, please use a file sharing service and send the URL 
only.

(Note that statistically, over the past few years, fewer than 1% of messages 
were larger than 512KB.)

Thanks for your understanding,

Jean


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part