Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114355
Return-Path: <cschneid@cschneid.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 48660 invoked from network); 10 May 2021 21:50:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5)
  by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 May 2021 21:50:18 -0000
Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D267A1804B1
	for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 10 May 2021 14:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,SPF_HELO_NONE,
	SPF_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Envelope-From: <cschneid@cschneid.com>
Received: from darkcity.gna.ch (darkcity.gna.ch [195.49.47.11])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS
	for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 10 May 2021 14:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a02:1205:502d:fa80:4515:f93e:6f38:be99])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by darkcity.gna.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1DB84150E936
	for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 10 May 2021 23:57:51 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\))
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 23:57:51 +0200
References: <CAGBsUrePAey_fdAq0S_XtcnPhcXsB=tgnff0TUNfPo-AtTEheQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAGBsUrePAey_fdAq0S_XtcnPhcXsB=tgnff0TUNfPo-AtTEheQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B6CAE194-8B65-4471-9B46-78FE4CBFA144@cschneid.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.80.0.2.43)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Could we drop the bottom-posting rule?
From: cschneid@cschneid.com (Christian Schneider)

No.
Outlook is not modern.
No.
That's not the point, the missing context is.

Sorry, could not resist ;-)

- Chris


> Am 10.05.2021 um 23:51 schrieb Kamil Tekiela <tekiela246@gmail.com>:
> 
> Hi Internals,
> 
> Could we drop the bottom-posting rule?
> 
> Almost all new contributors fall into this trap and reply to a thread by
> top-posting, only to get chastised by someone else on the list. It's really
> difficult to remember to delete the default reply. Mail clients don't make
> it easy for us; it's hidden by default. Bottom-posting makes reading the
> thread much more difficult too. The actual reply gets lost in between the
> quoted content. I often get confused about what is new and what was
> quoted. Many modern clients are designed to handle top-posting and don't
> handle bottom-posting well. People are usually used to it and they read
> from top to bottom. I don't know if in the past some mail clients defaulted
> to bottom-posting but right now it just seems like an unnecessary
> annoyance.
> 
> If you want to quote someone then it makes sense to copy a part of the
> message and then add a reply below, but forcing people to remove the
> default reply from the mail client and then add the whole previous message
> on top of your own reply isn't very productive. It wastes time and screen
> space.
> 
> Could we please change this rule or at least stop enforcing it?
> Do people actually have mail clients that don't automatically hide the
> previous conversation? If not, then I think we can let people top-post.
> 
> Regards,
> Kamil