This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: RedBoot + Configuration tool 2.11 question
- From: Jonathan Larmour <jifl at eCosCentric dot com>
- To: Gregg C Levine <hansolofalcon at worldnet dot att dot net>
- Cc: 'eCos Discussion' <ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 01:35:55 +0100
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] RedBoot + Configuration tool 2.11 question
- References: <003c01c356e1$91dfcee0$0100a8c0@who5>
I had written:
>>
>>[ Note HTML is normally rejected by the ecos-discuss list as it is a
>>reasonably good indicator of spam in general, as well as being
>>incompatible with many mail readers ]
Gregg C Levine wrote:
Not really relevant to the subject, but its attached to the
declaration. Jonathan, I missed the meaning behind that blurb in the
square brackets. What are you referring to?
It means that in an attempt to reduce spam that passes through this list
we take various approaches to reduce it. You'll notice that very little
spam passes through the list. One of the reasons is measures like this
where all HTML mail is filtered (at least, last I looked it was).
This may affect a few posters initially, but most MUAs can be set up to
post in plaintext to individual addresses, although to be honest it's more
sociable to default to text anyway unless you know the recipient uses an
HTML capable mailer. And that's another incidental benefit of this: that
users not wishing to use HTML mailers don't get disenfranchised.
I can't imagine any reason why HTML would improve things on the eCos list.
Jifl
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss