[rescue] what can you do with an Apple Quadro 840AV
sun.mail.list47 at oryx.us
Wed Mar 28 01:11:53 CDT 2018
I was about to just blindly defend Mr. Bill, our very gracious host here, but I figured I better do some fact checking before I
stick my foot into my mouth.
Looking at everyone's mail header, I see the following
As I head over the the Mailman home page
I see that there are (2) current version trains. Here is a direct cut-and-paste:::
The current stable GNU Mailman versions are:
19-Nov-2017 Mailman 3.1.1 (Between The Wheels)
04-Feb-2018 Mailman 2.1.26
I see that from the X-header version, vs the current 2.1.x version, there is a .06 variance.
I did review the change log, focusing in on the 2.1.20 to 2.1.27 versions, and, although I do see a few updates with translations to
several languages, nothing jumped out at me that would indicate there had been any changes (big or otherwise) to the UTF-8
implementation, in the 2.1.x train.
change logs here:
In short, from my observations, I'm don't believe that an upgrade from 2.1.20 to 2.1.26/27 (current stable) would change UTF-8
behaviorism's. If someone else sees something I missed, please share.
Would an upgrade to the 3.1.x train help here? Certainly possible, someone else will need to review the specific update files. A
quick glance, however, was the only UTF-8 entry in the 3.1.x change log that I found:::
For Python versions earlier than 3.5, use a compatibility layer for a
backported smtpd module which can accept non-UTF-8 data. (Closes #140)
I think in closing, if I was in a foreign land, and the UTF-8 issues were more pronounced, I would probably care more about this.
Right now, it doesn't seem to be that big of a deal to me. All things being equal, I know that the last few years have been pretty
rough on Mr. Bill, and with all the crazy stuff going on in his personal life, I believe that I am pretty thankful that Mr. Bill is
still here, and providing all the things he does for us.
If you're still reading, thanks for wading thru my rant.
Happy Easter everyone,
On 27/03/18 16:33, Chris Hanson wrote:
> Again, the use of an archaic or broken version of mailman to run the mailing
> list is a choice.
> Everybody can run software that is able to deal with these decades-old
> -- Chris
More information about the rescue