[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>
Ted,
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