From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: smtp crap Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <8739f4kzp3.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ipo0p1bc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <58C87CB9F44943A7BBE78F2D6B62A850@us.oracle.com> <83botsf06d.fsf@gnu.org> <83k48cxj85.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwizxwy1.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318359087 16436 80.91.229.12 (11 Oct 2011 18:51:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:51:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, miles@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 11 20:51:19 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RDhQ1-0003ku-Bm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 20:51:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50475 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDhQ0-0008Kx-Eb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48685) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDhPw-0008Kg-W5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDhPv-0003wR-U1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:08 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:36134) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDhPu-0003vt-3X; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:06 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p9BIp0i0023405; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:00 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D4496B41EC; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:51:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83fwizxwy1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:25:10 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4007=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9286 : core <4007> : streams <690457> : uri <981162> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:144905 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80302 Archived-At: >> There's fundamentally one question with 3 possible answers: >> >> How do you want to send email? >> 1- Use the system mailer (old default). >> 2- Use your favorite non-Emacs MUA. >> 3- Configure Emacs so it can send email on its own. >> >> If there's no /usr/sbin/sendmail, answer 1 is not available. > If (1) is sendmail, then its wording should be modified, because > Windows users will think it refers to their MUA. I'd expect those Windows users won't have /usr/sbin/sendmail so the option shouldn't be presented to them. > Anyway, the question was not about the choices, which are quite clear. > The question was about the UI: how will we ask these questions, in > which sequence, and what wording? I don't expect any sequence: it's just one question. The wording above is a starting point. It could be a x-popup-dialog, or a completing-read, or read-char-choice. > I think getting this right is crucial for avoiding the n+1st round of > arguing about this issue. Agreed. > Were these aspect finalized yet (I didn't track this thread closely)? I find the above so obvious that it didn't occur to me to put it in writing. Is there some other way to do it? Stefan