Josh Berkus wrote:
The only additional idea I have is that we ought to simply strip away any
e-mail footer over 4 lines from the archives. Not only would this purge the
confidentiality footers, it would save us some space in general.
The effort it would take to write some code to extract
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Josh Berkus wrote:
The only additional idea I have is that we ought to simply strip away any
e-mail footer over 4 lines from the archives. Not only would this purge
the
confidentiality footers, it would save us some space in general.
The effort it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/12/07, Tom Lane wrote:
A more serious objection is that any automated tool would probably get it
wrong sometimes, and strip important text.
I vote 'lets not bother'
Right. I agree with Josh's idea about mentioning list policies in the
Andrew Hammond wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/12/07, Tom Lane wrote:
A more serious objection is that any automated tool would probably get it
wrong sometimes, and strip important text.
I vote 'lets not bother'
Right. I agree with Josh's idea about mentioning
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew Hammond wrote:
Why? If the legal mumbo-jumbo has already got some precedence as being
un-enforcable (even if it's only in a handful of jurisdictions), why
give it even a patina of credibility by addressing it in a policy?
It is always a good
