From unknown Sat Aug 16 18:20:02 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#58119 <58119@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#58119 <58119@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: 29.0.50; Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? Reply-To: bug#58119 <58119@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 01:20:02 +0000 retitle 58119 29.0.50; Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? reassign 58119 emacs submitter 58119 Stefan Kangas severity 58119 wishlist thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Sep 27 13:16:58 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Sep 2022 17:16:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56677 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odECY-0005Gi-9N for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:58 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:55350) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odECT-0005GW-5s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49202) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1odECA-0006oI-Si for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:52 -0400 Received: from mail-oo1-xc35.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c35]:38497) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1odEC9-0007Vu-EU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:34 -0400 Received: by mail-oo1-xc35.google.com with SMTP id z9-20020a4a4909000000b0047651b95fbdso1656880ooa.5 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 10:16:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:from:from:to:cc:subject :date; bh=RJUxGKx9aDlgvYMM2pThvbZJEt/6l1DAWLIdTSv1EJ8=; b=GEZ9xcm9gAJ/m194qGUoIWZrXm0BbW124ry28KCIffCl0XbvDhOdnVEYTJHAHWD7vb P/xQekX5eabQac/M6PQd9HIcgwkxv4oXrB8fSqrfRZQ5nZYgGJ2zQrKmn7NLqwrPjNf+ oiHDmxtbypQJ40XOX2FK1RFjAsMYN2gTSMfxoc7yBtukXHZfx8VESyiKboBzEhbIvsPP EdVQ75CAuLNL76KjhvgScVNUC2kxnwMxxsekhbtCgbbNUAjslrzy6kdbJ0UGdLg80KW+ IbuOBR6X3IDRVpxLucCnMqr0+1tE6dje8To2rV3ED8/Luw5454yejtmZK22On5fC9Zq2 xdwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:from:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=RJUxGKx9aDlgvYMM2pThvbZJEt/6l1DAWLIdTSv1EJ8=; b=YFSSrQRVjfyn4xkz839f+X8YjrcRAvL+AgEG7c9dyUYSkz1F5jQTqhS1STmgVzWusE 6mfGjT0zbf/lEuyeKfcLjtbTlf2Z4ecjHq1e1AfZS9OHRtZSDfWN020pnn00ZjNxVbhe IjS6zQS7Wy4YaPkDPJ1CNGd6H2z7PA24IcLPA92z8pTXVtyXy3KynF0YL3uhJV1h6Y0i 9DxwLsMeYoXISO5DsWMBCvL+SPsIs76pGb/u+Gyg3qVDIAJcLdEt1Zt8e5wCL/ytzsh0 5d/PKsfKo8PCeblJwdvp7l28LEBtol0DHVmI9sezoykD9bH22XBuAQ4Z7tDDum+t3yBM F0dw== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf25wcUPkAwCc9tD8cV5QY7ff7lKbQCGmZhGM9kK4lvxAXC7FuYy C8JI6mzGjEtPUoX7+FV7+F+Slh2NagHF32t36BNgkYuJ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4o0ovwQQELBmdyhiA4r570Uy0/ZI3M9YaHnuPbcfDsf2VQk8OwlLuk73TWjHctLRtYpjtrbGLxAr0Jm63VgCs= X-Received: by 2002:a4a:a70a:0:b0:475:601f:1e14 with SMTP id g10-20020a4aa70a000000b00475601f1e14mr11086387oom.5.1664298991978; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:31 -0400 From: Stefan Kangas X-Hashcash: 1:20:220927:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org::OeVWUIWDHUJ/HUWw:0a1w MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:31 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: 29.0.50; Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::c35; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-oo1-xc35.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Severity: wishlist Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? Perhaps the bits and pieces of useful information there should be moved elsewhere, where it is more discoverable, and the file removed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Sep 27 13:32:08 2022 Received: (at 58119) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Sep 2022 17:32:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56693 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odERE-0007sM-B4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:32:08 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:54896) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odERC-0007rt-FT for 58119@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:32:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References: In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=42UvrgZCWGpsIlODbTVI2Y2KlQdTDdCD/9JBS3CwG0w=; b=udzIvmNZb+4p4+DVTNAdK5KEUu nX69TczCpK/npHCtNcwTBI50NrBAPvE/HifEAx0pCc34bTBObwnEmElLhE/vaZn3Z/83/q0GK4YXy W1eOifs/Lfl0p8d5WFP1B6hlhcgmi7hzPpt32rhX2FykIv1H1JpVhtoXlG+k285ytLZU=; Received: from [84.212.220.105] (helo=joga) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1odER4-00041T-6A; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 19:32:00 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#58119: 29.0.50; Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:16:31 -0400") References: Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAD1BMVEXSPojkR5WfMmxV Gz////9Th9zBAAAAAWJLR0QEj2jZUQAAAAlwSFlzAAAPYQAAD2EBqD+naQAAAAd0SU1FB+YJGxAu KdNS0uAAAAGqSURBVDjLbZSLscQgCEVRGwDTgMEGDPTf27uYz8bdx+wwG0+4fNQQwSRcktvOpaxZ lbSRquZGkjhxvEbFu7v5oO4d/+A9G+PF0vFsZtS13zaqHhfwkYo9wFn3AFNKQuqOuEBIPSC8JxVi FKXUdqktw1hrJkXplLtBSlbjJOSmSDJ+CMUybBepKkw1xQQqmsweRbklqfB9Myuqmw2K3Ao4GMDL 5gNFwiO5+5yKcEwra8Ovog9MLDr3hgQNw2siWbgCJNkCJCl+WcwiAMRnKzeIxgIwImbJsT9RS46t ScSo+gTc3i1SuD4gu7P9gBKqo55z4XdEKLXN9h9gmi33enxJcYwQ+7FZWkGfgPfixyqlfS4cXlfA OU9xb7xKcdVZqGJ/FkB56LPVS4SOssu3RfLqOV3H/BM0G7zWkV7SOwItTN8xxf+AevvqXKqdM6bz 8RXRI6Rj29IKROcof3dw2jLbN+jrwf4A3/8H1U8lvsEtPEvOOKVKtEQUD6e4umoPiLDNF+0zDFf0 AncGXLX5dWFK3SXRmZJxN4SuIAA+v0EJB7vj4jz9+acHhtQfoyVmU+1qV1EAAAAldEVYdGRhdGU6 Y3JlYXRlADIwMjItMDktMjdUMTY6NDY6NDErMDA6MDB3WmI9AAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOm1vZGlmeQAy MDIyLTA5LTI3VDE2OjQ2OjQxKzAwOjAwBgfagQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Now-Playing: Nina Simone's _Dont Let Me Be Misunderstood_: "What More Can I Say" Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 19:31:57 +0200 Message-ID: <87fsgc206q.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Stefan Kangas writes: > Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? > > Perhaps the bits and pieces of useful information there should be moved > elsewhere, where it is more discoverable, and the file removed. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58119 Cc: 58119@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Stefan Kangas writes: > Is gnus-coding.texi worth keeping around? > > Perhaps the bits and pieces of useful information there should be moved > elsewhere, where it is more discoverable, and the file removed. I didn't see anything of any value in that file, so I've now removed it. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Sep 27 13:32:17 2022 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Sep 2022 17:32:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56696 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odERN-0007sj-LE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:32:17 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:54912) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1odERL-0007sU-3t for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:32:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Subject:From:To:Message-Id:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=f3TUFWI6udsCAwBAkd4itQ5pEk+XUu7u61ZTTkyj6Kc=; b=lY3m9PM7Ej/dXB9V9/rv4nyHdR YUzgSGoDJtNkK/Z5DPnSD7g7mACYx6PNTRSj5pkVxFJNeAllNv0CYc+MX3TZGVlEzSbRUye+lIjlL vMevmloCpTwZBeSNBGssd2bGXZbfWeAL0lMJ2G/XZonm3vKmohQYSXc8mVwEgIOoMiek=; Received: from [84.212.220.105] (helo=joga) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1odERD-00041f-67 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 19:32:09 +0200 Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 19:32:06 +0200 Message-Id: <87edvw206h.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #58119 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: close 58119 29.1 quit Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) close 58119 29.1 quit From unknown Sat Aug 16 18:20:02 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 11:24:08 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator