On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 12:11:04 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Another option could be to add a new modifier, like P(rivate) or
> > U(ser), to be used like XPBS-Field: which would preserve the X-. But
> > then you need a new enough dpkg-dev to be able t
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Another option could be to add a new modifier, like P(rivate) or
> U(ser), to be used like XPBS-Field: which would preserve the X-. But
> then you need a new enough dpkg-dev to be able to get that field.
I like that idea. It's not a big deal to have to u
Hi!
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 12:03:09 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > If you're going to standardize a prefix that's purely for private,
> > internal use and will never, ever be standardized in any fashion, could I
> > convince you (and Nils) to use a pref
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> If you're going to standardize a prefix that's purely for private,
>> internal use and will never, ever be standardized in any fashion, could I
>> convince you (and Nils) to use a prefix other than X-? E-mail has
>> poisoned the
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> If you're going to standardize a prefix that's purely for private,
> internal use and will never, ever be standardized in any fashion, could I
> convince you (and Nils) to use a prefix other than X-? E-mail has
> poisoned the well on X-, and now people re
5 matches
Mail list logo
