Re: sendmail.el bug or expected behavior?

[Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> I set up the code the way it is because it caused a delay of a few
> seconds when everything was working properly.  I found that unacceptable.

I suspect we just disagree about the default.  As I've mentioned, I'd
favor arranging things so that mail loss is less likely by default,
even if doing so might introduce a few scond delay.  Of course we'd
also need to provide good documentation for the alternative setting
for those systems and people for whom the delay is a problem.

However, I also got the impression from the current disussion that we
might have other alternatives now.  For example, are (most) MTAs
better about queueing now, and can emacs itself handle queueing, and
if either of these things is true, then can we arrange for
alternatives that satisfy (nearly) everyone now?

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4