Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-12 Thread Chris Wedgwood
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 07:44:28AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > Don't use crappy MUAs? Well, plenty of people do. It's almost the norm so crappy probably isn't very fair. It does seem that most if the GUI-base MUAs though by default have problematic settings (Mozilla, Thunderbird, Evolution

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-12 Thread John W. Linville
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 10:36:34PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:20:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > Yes. Opening attachments makes them harder to review. > > Lots of people can't inline patches because they are inflicted with > crappy MUAs --- I would much p

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-12 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 10:36:34PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:20:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > Yes. Opening attachments makes them harder to review. > > Lots of people can't inline patches because they are inflicted with > crappy MUAs --- I would much

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-11 Thread Chris Wedgwood
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:20:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > Yes. Opening attachments makes them harder to review. Lots of people can't inline patches because they are inflicted with crappy MUAs --- I would much prefer patches as attachments in those cases versus mangled patches. Also, I

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-05 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Saturday 06 August 2005 03:49, Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:20:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 02:41:30AM +1000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > On Friday 05 August 2005 13:04, Mateusz Berezecki wrote: > > > > I accidentaly posted the patches as

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-05 Thread Dave Jones
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:20:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 02:41:30AM +1000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > On Friday 05 August 2005 13:04, Mateusz Berezecki wrote: > > > I accidentaly posted the patches as MIME attachments... its 5:03 am here > > > Does anybody s

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-05 Thread Jeff Garzik
John W. Linville wrote: On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 02:41:30AM +1000, Daniel Phillips wrote: On Friday 05 August 2005 13:04, Mateusz Berezecki wrote: I accidentaly posted the patches as MIME attachments... its 5:03 am here Does anybody still care if patches are posted as attachments, particula

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-05 Thread John W. Linville
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 02:41:30AM +1000, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Friday 05 August 2005 13:04, Mateusz Berezecki wrote: > > I accidentaly posted the patches as MIME attachments... its 5:03 am here > Does anybody still care if patches are posted as attachments, particularly > for > review as

Re: argh... ;/

2005-08-05 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Friday 05 August 2005 13:04, Mateusz Berezecki wrote: > I accidentaly posted the patches as MIME attachments... its 5:03 am here > already. Sorry guys. > I can resubmit if you want. I just dont want do that now and not trash > your mailboxes Does anybody still care if patches are posted as atta

argh... ;/

2005-08-04 Thread Mateusz Berezecki
I accidentaly posted the patches as MIME attachments... its 5:03 am here already. Sorry guys. I can resubmit if you want. I just dont want do that now and not trash your mailboxes Mateusz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROT