[Nut-upsdev] RFC: new variable battery.status

Charles Lepple clepple at gmail.com
Sat Nov 8 13:38:15 UTC 2014

On Nov 7, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at mittelstaedt.us> wrote:

> Now I suppose your going to respond with that immature drivel that's been floating around, lets see if I remember it:
>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>    > Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>    >> Top-posting.
>>    >>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> We all must make sure our postings are formatted so your circa 1982 /bin/mail command can still read it <eyeroll>


As someone who spends a lot of time digging through the NUT mailing list archives, trying to find the context for previous list discussions, this is actually not such a ridiculous request. I know, we could solve this by moving to some mailing list software that folds previous replies like current mail readers do. But it's a lot of work for not much gain.

While the text formatting hasn't evolved much since Usenet, I would hope the people have evolved during that same timeframe. You seem to have a lot of UPS experience, and it's a shame that we can't put it to a more constructive use. I'm still open to the doc/FAQ improvements we discussed in July.

Charles Lepple
clepple at gmail

More information about the Nut-upsdev mailing list