[Python-Dev] Summary of Tracker Issues (original) (raw)

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