Tim Legant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How many times have you noticed a message from someone in your > pending queue, realized that you wanted to whitelist them but didn't > really want to read their message? That's what you're saying is > more "intuitive" than Jim's suggestion. Is that really what you > mean?
What I'm saying is that the term ``whitelist'' doesn't imply ``release'', therefore releasing after whitelisting the address is non-intuitive behavior. It's so non-intuitive that I wasted several days on Jeff Ross' bug report because I never considered this was the case. So, if you want a behavior that does whitelist + release, we need to find another term for it so that it doesn't trip others up like it did me. Or, make the default for PENDING_WHITELIST_RELEASE False, but document it well so that users who want the converse behavior can have it. Either is ok with me, but I'm not comfortable with adding PENDING_WHITELIST_RELEASE with a default value of True. _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
