Re: [Python-Dev] Proposed: change to posting rules for python-dev
[Skip]
Wasn't that how things worked when the list was first formed? If so, what was the rationale for the change to the current policy?
[Barry]
Yes, it was. I don't remember why it was changed; we were probably accused of exclusivity. That's how these things often happen.
I think we're confusing distinct gimmicks: at the start, anyone could post to python-dev, but a subscription request had to be approved by the list admin. Only the latter has changed. I read Barry as asking about changing the former this time, while leaving the latter alone.
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 20:59, tim.one@comcast.net wrote:
[Skip]
Wasn't that how things worked when the list was first formed? If so, what was the rationale for the change to the current policy?
[Barry]
Yes, it was. I don't remember why it was changed; we were probably accused of exclusivity. That's how these things often happen.
That wern't me. I think it was Fred.
I think we're confusing distinct gimmicks: at the start, anyone could post to python-dev, but a subscription request had to be approved by the list admin. Only the latter has changed. I read Barry as asking about changing the former this time, while leaving the latter alone.
Yep. -Barry
Tim attributes something to Barry:
[Barry]
Yes, it was. I don't remember why it was changed; we were probably accused of exclusivity. That's how these things often happen.
Someone also claiming to be "Barry" retorts: [Barry]
That wern't me. I think it was Fred.
If you scan the headers of "Fred"'s message, you'll find 13 in there. That's Barry's secret number, so Barry must have sent it. Fred's secret number is 68, and the headers of this later msg claiming to be from Barry contain: Message-Id: <1075514668.1075.375.camel@anthem> ^^ QED. Nevertheless, I agree that the message I attributed to Barry *claimed* to have been sent by Fred. I'm afraid you'll have to work harder than that to make a fool of me, guys.
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004, Tim Peters wrote:
Tim attributes something to Barry:
[Barry]
Yes, it was. I don't remember why it was changed; we were probably accused of exclusivity. That's how these things often happen.
Someone also claiming to be "Barry" retorts:
[Barry]
That wern't me. I think it was Fred.
If you scan the headers of "Fred"'s message, you'll find 13 in there. That's Barry's secret number, so Barry must have sent it. Fred's secret number is 68, and the headers of this later msg claiming to be from Barry contain:
Message-Id: <1075514668.1075.375.camel@anthem> ^^
QED. Nevertheless, I agree that the message I attributed to Barry *claimed* to have been sent by Fred. I'm afraid you'll have to work harder than that to make a fool of me, guys.
No, they won't. This is python-dev, not psf-members; we don't care who's posting here (as long experience with bots proves), only whether they make sense. You're not making sense, so your bot needs a tuneup. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "The joy of coding Python should be in seeing short, concise, readable classes that express a lot of action in a small amount of clear code -- not in reams of trivial code that bores the reader to death." --GvR
[Tim]
If you scan the headers of "Fred"'s message, you'll find 13 in there. That's Barry's secret number, so Barry must have sent it. Fred's secret number is 68, and the headers of this later msg claiming to be from Barry contain ...
Hey, why does everybody else get a secret number and all I get are occasional splats after my signature block? Raymond
participants (5)
-
Aahz -
Barry Warsaw -
Raymond Hettinger -
Tim Peters -
tim.one＠comcast.net