New FE vulnerabilities
jkeating at redhat.com
Thu Mar 9 20:37:40 UTC 2006
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 22:14 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> Why is that? I would MUCH prefer if discussions would be kept on-list.
> Apologies if this was explained earlier, I missed the first few posts
I guess it depends on how we use this list. We may want to ping for
somebody to help with a given package, but not want to have a public
record of the discussion of sensitive matter until such time as updates
are prepared. I don't want to see this list become a place for hackers
to listen in on what packages are known to be flawed.
> > I'd MUCH rather see reply-to
> > > NOT get munged and create misfires to the list itself. I'm sorry your
> > > client doesn't support list-post, perhaps complain upstream?
> > Mine isn't and I'm using thunderbird, which is imho a respectable
> > client, thus assuming that clients handle reply-list is a wrong assumption.
> The FC4 Evolution I'm using does kind of support it, but the option is
> not very prominently available in the UI. And because very few lists
> are configured in a way that I need to take special care to get my
> replies to go to the list address, the keyboard shortcut doesn't stick
> very easily in muscle memory.
It took me VERY little time to get used to <ctrl>l to reply list. I am
on a LOT of lists and not all are configured the same. Remembering
<ctrl>l for every list will always do the right thing wrt replying to
the list. There are other RFE matters against munging the reply-to
headers, but that's an exercise for the bored. I've voiced my opinion,
others can do the same.
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Fedora-security-list