~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

2 2

Re: Why hard wrap at 72 in lists

Sam Whited
Details
Message ID
<8a7c2894-97c1-4329-a557-cb4b0a5b6c27@www.fastmail.com>
Sender timestamp
1548264389
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019, at 22:49, Ludovic Chabant wrote:
> As for the conclusion, I don't think there's any, as I don't think this
> policy on the sr.ht mailing lists is going to change. At this point I'm
> more interested in tips to solve/work around the consequences:

The policy for sr.ht lists doesn't have to change, but other people purchasing this software may want to host their own lists, and not have the same policy. Having support for their lists to be read on mobile devices would be nice.

—Sam

Re: Why hard wrap at 72 in lists

Details
Message ID
<996adaa7-5294-78bc-7d2e-4a9d9ea009c3@interia.pl>
In-Reply-To
<8a7c2894-97c1-4329-a557-cb4b0a5b6c27@www.fastmail.com> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1548274007
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
W dniu 23.01.2019 o 18:26, Sam Whited pisze:
> The policy for sr.ht lists doesn't have to change,

Unless you also want the web UI to reflow the format=flowed text.

Re: Why hard wrap at 72 in lists

Sam Whited
Details
Message ID
<0c48f1ba-3318-414b-9aed-0af089b099d1@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<996adaa7-5294-78bc-7d2e-4a9d9ea009c3@interia.pl> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1548276530
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, at 20:14, Wolf480pl wrote:
> Unless you also want the web UI to reflow the format=flowed text.

Fair; I just meant to suggest that there is still value in supporting
these sorts of features even if sr.ht itself doesn't want them to be
allowed. My own lists would make heavy use of this since I mostly use
clients that don't do wrapping and there's not much I can do about that.

—Sam

-- 
Sam Whited
sam@samwhited.com