On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 01:18:03PM +0200, Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado wrote: > > Saluton Chris :)
Gidday! :) > On Sun 10 May 2009 12:25 +0200, Chris Bannister <[email protected]> dixit: > > Isn't sending large attachments (2.6M) against the list code. > > I don't really know, I don't think it has been talked about previously > :? Anyway, this was a miskate of the poster, so I hope it won't be > repeated. True, but a note in the list conduct/subscribe notice could mention that attaching files bigger than a few K is frowned upon and instead they should be posted on the net and post the url. > > Can't the list software strip large attachments, please. […] > I can take a look at Google Groups to check if a limit on attachments > can be established, but after that the new policy should be agreed > upon... (meaning: I won't impose such policy unless Bram tells so). Ahhh!, of course, "Google Groups" ... not worth jumping through hoops for something that may never happen again, but if it is a simple admin checkbox toggle then, if set, maybe it should be mentioned in the code of conduct that attachments over a certain size will be stripped so that they might realise why their post has lost the attachment and they won't rpeatedly send it. -- Chris. ====== I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. -- Stephen F Roberts --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
