On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:51:26PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
map g !G perl -MText::Autoformat -eautoformat CR
map z !G perl -MText::Autoformat -e 'autoformat{ all = 1 }' CR
...shamelessly stolen, lock stock and barrel from Damian's article in
the new TPJ. :-)
Cool, thanks.
Damian is so cool...
The next version of Text::Autoformat (which should be out before TPC5)
will also leave header lines and sigs unmolested, making it truly useful
for email tidying.
Now if he'd just stop blaming me for stuff like DWIM.pm... ;-)
Well, I would if you'd just stop
Minor problemette is, when 1.0.4 is called at the end of the file:
Can't call method signature on an undefined value at
/usr/local/share/perl/5.6.0/Text/Autoformat.pm line 779.
Noted and fixed for the next release.
Damian
. Deal with it.
...bad language and shouting isn't big, and it isn't clever.
/Robert
- Original Message -
From: Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 May 2001 22:00
Subject: Re: Election Manifestos
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 09:50:47PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote
Chris Ball wrote:
I used to use At-mail a lot at work. Pseudo-interesting question of the
day; do you really feel it was ripped off (in the stigmatism-attached
sense of the word), or given that it was GPLed or Artistic'd anyway, that
it's fair play to them and that's something that happens
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Richard Clamp wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:13:12AM +0100, Robert Shiels wrote:
Typical quotes from Simon this week:
Ah, he'd be fine if it weren't for those fucking mood swings.
You see, this is why we don't need to make a london-perl-mongers movie.
If we did,
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Simon Wistow wrote:
Have no problem with them making money out of it it was just that it was
ripped off and not released under the GPL and/or the changes sent back
to us.
They don't have to under the artistic licence. However, they do have to
duplicate all of the
Paul Makepeace sent the following bits through the ether:
Have you integrated into a mail server (module, procmail, whatever)
.muttrc:
set editor=/home/acme/bin/autoformat %s; xemacs -nw %s
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
Iterative
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Leon Brocard wrote:
Paul Makepeace sent the following bits through the ether:
Have you integrated into a mail server (module, procmail, whatever)
.muttrc: set editor=/home/acme/bin/autoformat %s; xemacs -nw %s
Leon
in PINE
S SETUP - C Config
display-filters:
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:21:08AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Well, I would if you'd just stop putting those evil thoughts in my head...
Evil Ideas BOF at TPC. ISAGN.
--
God Save the Queen!
And let Satan take the Prime Minister...
- Tanuki, in the monastery.
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:59:12AM +0100, Richard Clamp wrote:
Ah, he'd be fine if it weren't for those fucking mood swings.
You mean I'm nice at times?
--
Ever wake up feeling like a null pointer? -Allan Pratt
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:59:12AM +0100, Richard Clamp wrote:
Ah, he'd be fine if it weren't for those fucking mood swings.
You mean I'm nice at times?
Aren't you standing for London.pm in the election?
--
Dave Hodgkinson,
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Damian is so cool...
The next version of Text::Autoformat (which should be out before TPC5)
will also leave header lines and sigs unmolested, making it truly useful
for email tidying.
Huzzah!
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:21:08AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Now if he'd just stop blaming me for stuff like DWIM.pm... ;-)
Well, I would if you'd just stop putting those evil thoughts in my head...
The David made me do it!??
:-)
dha
--
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
* David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 09:21:08AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Now if he'd just stop blaming me for stuff like DWIM.pm... ;-)
Well, I would if you'd just stop putting those evil thoughts in my head...
The David made me do it!??
At 17:37 22/05/2001, Roger Burton West wrote:
On or about Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:23:32PM +0100, Cross David - dcross typed:
I've not actually seen the manifesto, but from what I'm told it really means
If you can't be bothered to take a few minutes to look, why the hell are
you posting about
Cross David - dcross sent the following bits through the ether:
This, of course, presupposes that acmemail passes everyone's
definition of a decent mail client. And if it doesn't, we can just
slap the authors until it does :)
You'll be happy to know that I gave up ownership of acmemail a
From: Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:43 AM
Cross David - dcross sent the following bits through the ether:
This, of course, presupposes that acmemail passes everyone's
definition of a decent mail client. And if it doesn't, we can just
slap the authors
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 09:43:23AM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
It didn't hit critical mass. Discuss.
Yet Another Webmail Client; it wasn't exactly filling a gaping niche.
(And I say that as someone who may soon be maintaining one of the others...)
--
4.2BSD may not be a complete disaster, but
Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 09:43:23AM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
It didn't hit critical mass. Discuss.
Yet Another Webmail Client; it wasn't exactly filling a gaping niche.
(And I say that as someone who may soon be maintaining one of the others...)
It did at the time -
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 11:04:19AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
that Mail::Cclient is powerful but complicated and can be a bitch to
install,
And use. Ripping that fucker out would be my first act. :)
There's also http://www.horde.org/imp/ which is reasonably popular.
--
Jesus ate my mouse or
Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 11:04:19AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
that Mail::Cclient is powerful but complicated and can be a bitch to
install,
And use. Ripping that fucker out would be my first act. :)
There's also http://www.horde.org/imp/ which is reasonably popular.
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 11:17:14AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
But Mail::Cclient is also unbeleivably powerful. Lying round on my HD
there's a Mail::Cclient::Simple which amkes everything much easier but
it's one of many projects I've never got round to finishing. Why
reinvent the wheel by
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 11:17:14AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
But Mail::Cclient is also unbeleivably powerful. Lying round on my HD
there's a Mail::Cclient::Simple which amkes everything much easier but
it's one of many projects I've never got
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Simon Wistow wrote:
Imp was crap when we started and it's also PHP based. I like PHP (/me
gets coat) but I wouldn't do a large scale application in it (especially
since I had just just done one then and hit some very large limitations)
Could you elaborate on that a
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 02:06:13PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
But they fixed references in 6.0! No, wait, they just introduced a
load of Thread-* headers :-( Fucking morons.
They just innovated threading!
Tell me you're joking.
If I was joking I wouldn't have ignore Thread-
At 07:49 23/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
At 17:37 22/05/2001, Roger Burton West wrote:
And get a shell account, why don't you?
Thanks. I already have several.
[snip]
Much as I'd love it if everyone was to be able to post to the list from their
favourite Unix mail client all the time,
Simon Wistow wrote:
the DBI abstraction was, well, nonexistent.
As in, if your script has lots of calls to mysql_this and mysql_that, it
doesn't look very database independent.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:52:39PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
However, the cool futuristic stuff like CORRECT BLOODY WORK WRAPPING is
I generally avoid this issue by not working so much that it needs wrapping.
--
Niklas Nordebo -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- +447966251290
The day is seven hours
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:52:39PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:32:09PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Much as I'd love it if everyone was to be able to post to the list from their
favourite Unix mail client all the time,
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Cross David - dcross wrote:
From: Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:43 AM
Cross David - dcross sent the following bits through the ether:
This, of course, presupposes that acmemail passes everyone's
definition of a decent mail
Chris Ball sent the following bits through the ether:
I used to use At-mail a lot at work. Pseudo-interesting question of the
day; do you really feel it was ripped off (in the stigmatism-attached
sense of the word), or given that it was GPLed or Artistic'd anyway, that
it's fair play to them
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 09:50:47PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
@Mail (http://webbasedemail.com/) copied my code, my docs, and my
images without telling me, added a configuration file, and sold it. I
only found out about it by accident, which wasn't good. (it's changed
a lot since).
This is
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 12:23:49PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
You should use Damian's Text::AutoFormat. I just used it to reformat
the bit above beginning with Indeed. Lovely thing.
Have you integrated into a mail server (module, procmail, whatever)
so that it gets cleaned on the way in,
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:41:33PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 12:23:49PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
You should use Damian's Text::AutoFormat. I just used it to reformat
the bit above beginning with Indeed. Lovely thing.
Have you integrated into a mail server
On or about Tue, May 22, 2001 at 04:02:33PM +0100, Simon Wistow typed:
According to the Register ...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19112.html
the Tory's want to repeal IR35, make RIPA less strict and speed up Local
Loop unbundling, whereas Labour want to introduce laws meaning that if
on 22/5/01 4:02 pm, Simon Wistow wrote:
the Tory's want to repeal IR35, make RIPA less strict and speed up Local
Loop unbundling, whereas Labour want to introduce laws meaning that if
you pretend to be a teenager on the Net you can be jailed for 5 years
(bad luck bK).
It seems that every
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 04:16:16PM +0100, Chris Heathcote wrote:
From air-conditioned tubes, thru to RIPA, to cheap petrol, it's
bandwagon-jumping.
Ah, congratulations! You seem to have been completely politically
brainwashed; it's become so de rigeur for parties to completely
disregard the
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Simon Wistow wrote:
According to the Register ...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19112.html
the Tory's want to repeal IR35, make RIPA less strict and speed up Local
Loop unbundling, whereas Labour want to introduce laws meaning that if
you pretend to be a
At 16:02 22/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
the Tory's want to repeal IR35, make RIPA less strict and speed up Local
Loop unbundling, whereas Labour want to introduce laws meaning that if
you pretend to be a teenager on the Net you can be jailed for 5 years
(bad luck bK).
They are politicians. They
on 22/5/01 4:19 pm, Robin Szemeti wrote:
thank goodness for
proportioanl representation, it should make the next parliament a lot
more representative of what people actually want, ratehr than a choice
between 2 (and a half ) evils.
Errr... no PR yet for general elections!
Slight aside, but
Simon Cozens wrote:
I've yet to hear a Labour MP talk eloquently about anything at all. Anyone
ever talked - sorry, tried talking - to their MP about RIP?
Harriet Harman tried to tell me that I didn't really know about
computers or the Internet.
Personally I don't believe a word anybody says
Chris Heathcote sent the following bits through the ether:
It seems that every promise in the Tory manifesto is based on hearsay
It'd be okay if they were based on shaggy or fat boy slim...
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
Iterative
At 16:31 22/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 04:16:16PM +0100, Chris Heathcote wrote:
From air-conditioned tubes, thru to RIPA, to cheap petrol, it's
bandwagon-jumping.
Ah, congratulations! You seem to have been completely politically
brainwashed; i
The cynicism of the
On 22/05/2001 at 16:19 +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
the immediate feeling I get is to rent some cellars at the houses of
parliament and invest in a number of big barrels of gunpowder .. oh hang
on that ones been done before and had a distinctly negative outcome .. OK
.. perhaps someting more
on 22/5/01 4:46 pm, Simon Wistow wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote:
I've yet to hear a Labour MP talk eloquently about anything at all. Anyone
ever talked - sorry, tried talking - to their MP about RIP?
Harriet Harman tried to tell me that I didn't really know about
computers or the Internet.
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 04:44:25PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
We vote for the encumbent party until they screw up big time and then we
switch and repeat the process.
Except we don't while they can arrange for elections to be when everyone's
forgotten about their big screwups. Also, in
At 17:01 22/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
Right, yes, which is why we - sorry, you plural, I was way out of the country
at the time - elected Labour based on their fantastic performance last time
which lead to the General Strike and the Winter of Discontent. Sorry, a
nanosecond of thought would show
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:16:41PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Labour were voted in on the basis of the Tories screw ups.
Yes, so what you said about the party's previous record as, indeed,
irrelevant.
Labour hasn't screwed up yet.
Thanks, that's going in my sigfile.
Oh, and fix your
From: Simon Wistow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 4:03 PM
According to the Register ...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19112.html
the Tory's want to repeal IR35,
I've not actually seen the manifesto, but from what I'm told it really means
font size=bloody huge
On or about Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:23:32PM +0100, Cross David - dcross typed:
I've not actually seen the manifesto, but from what I'm told it really means
If you can't be bothered to take a few minutes to look, why the hell are
you posting about it? The actual text is:
A future Conservative
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:37:23PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
If you can't be bothered to take a few minutes to look, why the hell are
you posting about it?
But I wanna type, I wanna type, I wanna type!
Roger, where we come from we have a word for people like that.
--
I did write and
on 22/5/01 5:26 pm, Robin Szemeti wrote:
Errr... no PR yet for general elections!
really .. are you sure ? .. I'm certain this lot said they were going
to do something about that ... how odd.
It was part of the buttering-up in case of a need for a Lib-Lab pact. It's
certainly been pushed
Cross David - dcross sent the following bits through the ether:
[SNIP!]
Please fix your mailer to do proper In-Reply-To and References
headers. It's really really annoying.
Leon
--
... Money is the root of all wealth
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
Thanks, that's going in my sigfile.
Your sigfile is a mighty repository of evil.
Martin
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 06:49:01PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
Cross David - dcross sent the following bits through the ether:
[SNIP!]
Please fix your mailer to do proper In-Reply-To and References
headers. It's really really annoying.
I *loathe* Exchange.
But they fixed references in
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 11:11:23AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
I *loathe* Exchange.
But they fixed references in 6.0! No, wait, they just introduced a
load of Thread-* headers :-( Fucking morons.
They just innovated threading!
Tell me you're joking.
Martin
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Paul Mison wrote:
On 22/05/2001 at 16:19 +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
the immediate feeling I get is to rent some cellars at the houses of
parliament and invest in a number of big barrels of gunpowder .. oh hang
on that ones been done before and had a distinctly
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Robin Szemeti wrote:
hmmm .. I was tempted just to let it pass .. but I can't resist ;)
What you need to remember is this : They will say ANYTHING to get your
vote .. ANYTHING.
Even the truth? I'd very much doubt that.
Alex Gough
--
I don't believe that honesty
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:14:05PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 11:11:23AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
I *loathe* Exchange.
But they fixed references in 6.0! No, wait, they just introduced a
load of Thread-* headers :-( Fucking morons.
They just innovated
60 matches
Mail list logo
