On 5/18/07, Terry Reedy
"Stephen J. Turnbull"
wrote in message news:87lkfm8sds.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp... | I think it would be better to do content. URLs come to mind; without | something clickable, most commercial spam would be hamstrung. But | few bug reports and patches need to contain URLs, except for | specialized local ones pointing to related issues. A bug is a disparity between promise and performance. Promise is often best demonstrated by a link to the relevant section of the docs. Doc patches should also contain a such a link. So doc references should be included with local (to tracker) links and not filtered on.
| For example, how about requiring user interaction to display any post | containing an URL, until an admin approves it?
Why not simply embargo any post with an off-site link? Tho there might have been some, I can't remember a single example of such at SF. Anybody posting such could certainly understand "Because this post contains an off-site link, it will be embargoed until reviewed to ensure that it is legitimate."
| Or you could provide a preview containing the first two non-empty lines | not containing an URL. | This *would* be inconvenient for large attachments and other | data where the reporter prefers to provide an URL rather than the | literal data, but OTOH only people who indicate they really want to | see spam would see it. ;-)
I don't get this, but it sounds like more work than simple embargo.
I think html attachments should also be embargoed (I believe this is what I saw a couple of months ago.) And perhaps the account uploading an html file.
If you guys want to see any of this happen please take this discussion over to the tracker-discuss mailing list. -Brett