On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 16:26:12 -0400 Glenn Maynard wrote: > Sure, I understand the benefit. [...] > There's a cost, too, though. Source for images is often very big (eg. > layered PSDs). Source for sounds is often huge, [...] > (That's a separate question from "does the SC currently mandate it?"; > I think that a strict reading of the post-2004-003, pre-004 SC may, > but I'm not arguing SC interpretation here.)
Ah, I'm sorry, I thought you were arguing about freedom and its
requirements.
You were instead talking about practical (and rather reasonable)
concerns for archive capacity and the like.
Well, I would say: it's the price of freedom... :p
>
> > P.S.: I apologize for not setting the Mail-Followup-To header
> > correctly. I didn't manage to find out how to do it (even manually)
> > with Sylpheed: if someone knows, I'd welcome suggestions (in
> > private). TIA. I'm a debian-legal subscriber, so no need to Cc: me,
> > as long as debian-legal itself is among the recipients.
>
> You don't need to set MFT if you don't want a CC on Debian lists; not
> doing so is list policy default. You only need to worry about setting
> it if you do.
First of all, TNX for the explanation.
Actually, being a debian-legal subscriber I don't usually set any
Mail-Followup-To as I prefer when people reply to the list only (unless
they want to send me a private message: PGP/MIME encryption and digital
signature are welcome in that case!).
This time, however, I thought that I should keep the Mail-Followup-To:
debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-legal@lists.debian.org already set
in the thread...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | $ fortune
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | Q: What is purple
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | and commutes?
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | A: A boolean grape.
pgptwZxjptNof.pgp
Description: PGP signature
