subversion-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1816926 - /subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html
Date Fri, 01 Dec 2017 23:08:34 GMT
Giving some more details about this particular commit:

On 01/12/2017 23:55, wrote:
> Author: luke1410
> Date: Fri Dec  1 22:55:51 2017
> New Revision: 1816926
> URL:
> Log:
> * site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html: Replace two no
>    longer working/available links with replacements serving copies of the
>    original content.
> Modified:
>     subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html
> Modified: subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html
> URL:
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html (original)
> +++ subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/mailing-lists.part.html Fri Dec  1 22:55:51
> @@ -143,8 +143,8 @@ href="
>  "Principle of Least Damage" and "Can't Find My Way Back Home"
>  sections.  From time to time, someone posts asking why we don't set
>  the <tt>Reply-to</tt> header.  Sometimes that person will mention <a
> -href=""
> -></a>, which
> +href=""
> +></a>, which
The original link led me to a page stating: "It seems we can't find what
you're looking for".
I couldn't find an updated link on the original host (i.e. to that content, but was able to find what I believe is
the original content of this page at: [1]

That page has a link to the parent/root page leading to which explicitly
states that the link [1] is a local copy of the original link: Hence, I have no doubt
that the content is accurate and replacing the link should be fine.
Any objections?

>  gives arguments in favor of modifying the <tt>Reply-to</tt> field.
>  The list administrators are aware of both documents, and see that both
>  sides of the argument have merits, but in the end have chosen not to
> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ not a major inconvenience even when done
>  advice on how to not flame people for their bad quoting habits, see <a
>  href=""
>  ></a> (Deutsch:
> -<a href=""></a>).</p>
> +<a href=""></a>).</p>
>  </div> <!-- top-posting -->

Going to tries to bring up some advertisement
popup (which my browser blocked and I didn't review). The page just
shows some php-errors:

/*"Warning*//: require(/include/ failed to
open stream: No such file or directory in
line //*2*//
////*Fatal error*//: require(): Failed opening required
(include_path='.:/usr/local/lib/php') in
line //*2"*/

I could find a replacement which claims to be a local copy of the
content which was available at the now broken linked page. Again I don't
have any doubt that this is a correct capture of the original content
(though it might not have been the latest version). Still, IMO this
seems to be a reasonable replacement for the broken link, or does
anybody think otherwise?


View raw message