From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 30 16:45:16 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA8BB725;
 Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:45:16 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk)
Received: from csmtp3.one.com (csmtp3.one.com [91.198.169.23])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5727A8FC14;
 Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:45:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.50] (unknown [176.222.238.90])
 by csmtp3.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 57588240E4EF;
 Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:45:14 +0000 (UTC)
References: <4E593932.8060303@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAF6rxgnCPcisTFn37VtYsvHhttQvc1=DxXLuqq7kScJG3UL=cA@mail.gmail.com>
 <C76EF9E9-2F9A-4F49-9ADE-1C7074510BC4@cederstrand.dk>
 <86sj928vks.fsf@ds4.des.no>
 <4FB39F66-0434-43F1-9705-3C81CDF2A25F@cederstrand.dk>
 <86ehkm8s5v.fsf@ds4.des.no>
 <0EF669C7-0ED4-4BD4-9170-C49A7CA91603@cederstrand.dk>
 <20121025193115.GD40357@in-addr.com>
 <CAF6rxgmeJ9Kf-W3hEZwH2qCxoWve0Hqd27aYC=Y4wACyUm8+LQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGE5yCq_SrvcU1FzPN2U1=s+GahVRBOAhE6dy8KAwcG_-TDs+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20121030082900.GH3309@server.rulingia.com>
 <35AB4227-2053-4678-BE71-576B01E48FE1@cederstrand.dk>
 <CAJ-VmomWgbQyz-3x9Qsn9woBpEP1P4g7tWGWz53ZMQCPj4y-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmomWgbQyz-3x9Qsn9woBpEP1P4g7tWGWz53ZMQCPj4y-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <038C004A-6177-472D-A328-90830E04F640@cederstrand.dk>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A403)
From: Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>
Subject: Re: How about finally replacing GNATS?
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:45:12 +0100
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no>,
 "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:45:16 -0000

Den 30/10/2012 kl. 16.51 skrev Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>:

> On 30 October 2012 03:06, Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> wrote:
>=20
>> Apart from running uname -a, what does send-pr offer on a machine without=
 HTTP access compared to just filling out the send-pr form on a machine that=
 does have HTTP access?
>=20
> Being able to do it offline, and then having it send when you plug
> into the network :-)
>=20
> You realise SMTP, like NNTP/usenet, is really good at "partially offline" m=
odes?

Yes. I thought we were talking about machines with permanently firewalled ou=
tgoing port 80.

I'm not suggesting send-pr should go. I even provided a script to keep using=
 it with Bugzilla. I'm just curious what's so great about it in 2012. Offlin=
e is a good argument, and HTTP sucks at offline.

Erik=