Hello,
On 02/19/2004 03:16 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
I'd like to apoligize to the list for wasting bandwidth and venting
like this. Not only did this huge conversation accomplish nothing, it
was fairly personal and should have been conducted off list. I'll
stop doing such things unless they are
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/19/2004 02:35 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
I'd like to apoligize to the list for wasting bandwidth and venting
like this. Not only did this huge conversation accomplish nothing, it
was fairly personal and should have been conducted off list. I'll stop
doing such t
Hello,
On 02/19/2004 02:35 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
I'd like to apoligize to the list for wasting bandwidth and venting like
this. Not only did this huge conversation accomplish nothing, it was
fairly personal and should have been conducted off list. I'll stop doing
such things unless they are
I'd like to apoligize to the list for wasting bandwidth and venting like
this. Not only did this huge conversation accomplish nothing, it was
fairly personal and should have been conducted off list. I'll stop doing
such things unless they are on topic.
But I won't stop proposing usage of PEAR p
> If you study a little about the human nature you will realize
> that tehre would be people capable of doing that and much worse.
Indeed, but I also realize from those studies that some people
simply does not know when to stop.
--
PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, v
n: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Betreff: Re: [PHP-WIN] Re: Emailing via mail(), secondary servers
>
> Hello,
>
> On 02/18/2004 02:09 AM, Justin Patrin wrote:
> >>>> However, I am more interested in legitimate users that download and
> >>>> try the c
Hello,
On 02/18/2004 02:09 AM, Justin Patrin wrote:
However, I am more interested in legitimate users that download and
try the code. This helps me test my code more intensively and iron
any bugs or limitations much faster. I do not even wish or expect
people to thank me. As long as they test t
Wednesday, February 18, 2004 23:32
Subject: Re: [PHP-WIN] Re: Emailing via mail(), secondary servers
> Manuel Lemos wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 02/18/2004 06:40 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
> >
> >>>>> The main point of requiring a valid address
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/18/2004 06:40 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
The main point of requiring a valid address has nothing to
do with sending you spam, but rather to make it difficult
for some authors to boost their top download ranking
positions by creating many accounts and download their
Hello,
On 02/18/2004 06:40 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
The main point of requiring a valid address has nothing to
do with sending you spam, but rather to make it difficult
for some authors to boost their top download ranking
positions by creating many accounts and download their own
packages. That is
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/18/2004 02:15 PM, B.A.T. Svensson wrote:
The main point of requiring a valid address has nothing to
do with sending you spam, but rather to make it difficult
for some authors to boost their top download ranking
positions by creating many accounts and download the
Hello,
On 02/18/2004 02:15 PM, B.A.T. Svensson wrote:
The main point of requiring a valid address has nothing to
do with sending you spam, but rather to make it difficult
for some authors to boost their top download ranking
positions by creating many accounts and download their own
packages. That
> The main point of requiring a valid address has nothing to
> do with sending you spam, but rather to make it difficult
> for some authors to boost their top download ranking
> positions by creating many accounts and download their own
> packages. That is explained in the why page.
And that's of
Manuel Lemos wrote:
On 02/17/2004 07:26 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
However, I am more interested in legitimate users that download and
try the code. This helps me test my code more intensively and iron
any bugs or limitations much faster. I do not even wish or expect
people to thank me. As long
On 02/17/2004 11:11 PM, H Marc Bower wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Obviously, the "knowledge s*ckers" will not provide any valuable
feedback. Actually some of them even come in public just
to b*tch that
I require them to login to download my stu
> -Original Message-
> From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Obviously, the "knowledge s*ckers" will not provide any valuable
> >> feedback. Actually some of them even come in public just
> to b*tch that
> >> I require them to login to download my stuff. Some even threat to
On 02/17/2004 07:26 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
However, I am more interested in legitimate users that download and
try the code. This helps me test my code more intensively and iron any
bugs or limitations much faster. I do not even wish or expect people
to thank me. As long as they test the code
Once more into the breach.
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/13/2004 08:13 AM, B.A.T. Svensson wrote:
Why would you go watching TV in the neighbours house when you have
your own TV working at home?
Because of the usual reasons: they might have a bigger or better TV,
or they might have a broad
Hello,
On 02/13/2004 08:13 AM, B.A.T. Svensson wrote:
Why would you go watching TV in the neighbours house when you have your
own TV working at home?
Because of the usual reasons: they might have a bigger or better TV,
or they might have a broader selection on the cable TV network.
Besides the
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 01:55, Manuel Lemos wrote
> Why would you go watching TV in the neighbours house when you have your
> own TV working at home?
Because of the usual reasons: they might have a bigger or better TV,
or they might have a broader selection on the cable TV network.
Besides the tec
Hello,
On 02/12/2004 07:18 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
>> No, not directly, but that hardly seems to matter as the original post
>> asked about relaying.
>
>
> You do not seem to be paying attention. The original post asked
> explicitly about overriding relaying. Read again.
>
>
>> Problem 2
Manuel Lemos wrote:
>>
>> No, not directly, but that hardly seems to matter as the original post
>> asked about relaying.
>
>
> You do not seem to be paying attention. The original post asked
> explicitly about overriding relaying. Read again.
>
>
>> Problem 2
>> You can't override the relaying ser
Hello,
On 02/11/2004 09:35 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
Has anyone dealt with this? Any suggestions before I try and botch my
own solution?
I would suggest dumping Windows and use a Unix/Linux solution with
sendmail or compatible program like qmail, postfix, etc...
If you are stuck with Windows
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/11/2004 08:57 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
Has anyone dealt with this? Any suggestions before I try and botch my
own solution?
I would suggest dumping Windows and use a Unix/Linux solution with
sendmail or compatible program like qmail, postfix, etc...
If you
Hello,
On 02/11/2004 08:57 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:
Has anyone dealt with this? Any suggestions before I try and botch my
own solution?
I would suggest dumping Windows and use a Unix/Linux solution with
sendmail or compatible program like qmail, postfix, etc...
If you are stuck with Windows,
Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello,
On 02/11/2004 09:13 AM, Paul J. Smith wrote:
At the moment you only seem able to send mail via a specific host
specified in the ini file.I want some resilience so I can send
emails even if the first mail server cannot accept email.
Problem 1
As far as I know mail()
Hello,
On 02/11/2004 09:13 AM, Paul J. Smith wrote:
At the moment you only seem able to send mail via a specific host
specified in the ini file.I want some resilience so I can send
emails even if the first mail server cannot accept email.
Problem 1
As far as I know mail() returns no result so
"Paul J. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
At the moment you only seem able to send mail via a specific host
specified in the ini file.I want some resilience so I can send
emails even if the first mail server cannot accept email.
Problem 1
As far as
28 matches
Mail list logo
