Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114360 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 57779 invoked from network); 10 May 2021 22:29:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 May 2021 22:29:57 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F281804B1 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 15:37:35 -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=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-io1-f53.google.com (mail-io1-f53.google.com [209.85.166.53]) (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 ; Mon, 10 May 2021 15:37:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f53.google.com with SMTP id p11so16309195iob.9 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 15:37:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1lW5ITWMceEGP+oiRkaXshbVoDh9kZgymYf5NKL0Qpo=; b=KvFXCn+p6TGrT6uICY0/cFh+A9Xzhp1bZzIgxFsZERU2fgZxWwAIGcnrU9MfynizkL 8AWIKl/wXVTecylBUBqS0ZpP6PrRg50U3C6zLn6qenYLhzIREuRiNttQ7pZbDVnbhrj7 rEZe21IHV82QmFm4GhlS6lVLGUtxNfjCc7sI9NQ1aS5kCqrMo1l99hnWmu5RXulw/UsL x3Lj0bpbgrs0LqDmiLorROPess3IEGUV6ti8vZ/PPmcOHyMsL/9Naq2Mecz9e3thLiMO Yo5lHtKZcqCRZ4pLbRefUc/1PksZTIp8mN9at6exYD0gQvBV5Ss521LhK0CK/eRDu9gk IyOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1lW5ITWMceEGP+oiRkaXshbVoDh9kZgymYf5NKL0Qpo=; b=my2F5Vi++hheBEHE2Nh5kBgJyo74xscwdEgdYJr9QiBZZTVAWd0gBeeka9YPKh638v 5jpt35G6DGruxmS14fL9zg3zikR+3BsJNpHLmCFTmP9tmqWWg8zw1BmD0JgHUmYy+j5J q6mdh/+8YvWbaF2NffSt5wtTZZ84Id7BAqqJ9AG6grv5fpq8XHCUX4iI03rcOiwe7EJA 6wQl98sKSOHZWfJ+TX+r6oSfsZoE/achsDVn4lNAKPddlYR5t4hG32JTtwpcD7FeXhTn 0wmLdSvXnALpVQq5UmFlgl6nlzydepk9W+nI01IW6qYkau9ZvgzyM1c2ue0yq5hIoaN+ Crkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532KykE5wTd+JfgzhYzpfT2FK/ZBeSIlseAgAlbxUDDJBnnDI+9C BdqdafIRcjyE0Fu4Ts+MdRy1/FFhFaoUQcXq+/s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxLR9S+67QLrtplRJOgQ6Zan7JBMQGwkwTdkfGrgecv0hXrNpl7HTsmeIFI7SuzhY9u9H6WUPejQ7wyuSBxPRY= X-Received: by 2002:a02:782a:: with SMTP id p42mr812642jac.73.1620686248496; Mon, 10 May 2021 15:37:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 00:37:20 +0200 Message-ID: To: Kamil Tekiela Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002252a705c2016c46" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Could we drop the bottom-posting rule? From: deleugyn@gmail.com (Deleu) --0000000000002252a705c2016c46 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" That would be great! I had an unpleasant experience with this "rule". You start disagreeing with someone regarding an RFC and suddenly it becomes a reason to be called out. Not to mention that when I was pointed to the internal rules and guidelines, bottom posting is not explicitly listed as a rule, but rather a suggestion, which then makes it even more annoying to have someone chastising you about it because it feels much more like the issue is not really how you're responding to the list, but rather the fact that you're in disagreement. On Mon, May 10, 2021, 23:52 Kamil Tekiela wrote: > 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 > --0000000000002252a705c2016c46--