[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    RE: Mail sent to wine-devel
From:       Patrik Stridvall <ps () leissner ! se>
Date:       2000-10-27 20:28:04
[Download RAW message or body]

> Okay, I've approved, but it's on your own peril. 

Oh well < 100kb => < 20s with a 56k modem.
I don't expect anybody to be _that_ pissed off.
At least I hope not. :-)

> There is no 
> limit to the
> size of postings to wine-patches, but wine-devel, on the 
> other hand, runs
> with a 40K limit. This was discussed briefly by web-admin, and nobody
> there saw a problem with safety limits on the non-patches 
> lists.

It is not normally a problem. This RFC patch just happend to
be unusually big because of it is quite a lot of cut and
pasting to illustrate an idea.

I don't know. What does other people say?

Should large RFC patches be put on a webserver (WineHQ?)
or is it OK to post them on the list?

> Do anyone
> else around wish for us to increase the wine-devel limit? Even our
> low-bandwidth subscribers?

I do not wish to increase it for casual posters but
people that post a lot do not post large attachment
without a good reason.

Sure I _could_ have, by misstake, attached one (or more)
of 5Mb+ debug logs that was in the same directory so we
probably should have some limit. That probably would
have pissed people off. :-)

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]