[Python-Dev] Summary of Tracker Issues
Terry Reedy
tjreedy at udel.edu
Sat May 19 00:03:49 CEST 2007
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote in message
news:87lkfm8sds.fsf at 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.
Terry Jan Reedy
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list