Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.
Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Oct 2021 04:33:39 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 12 00:33:39 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33146 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ma9Tv-0005IE-AV
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 00:33:39 -0400
Received: from mail-pf1-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]:43604)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1ma9Tt-0005I1-Tz
for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 00:33:38 -0400
Received: by mail-pf1-f169.google.com with SMTP id 187so16531583pfc.10
for <46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:user-agent
:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=zt8Fo15OLsHXuPhkEDDx5tTiNAkiqnb7fCVcvHbgssA=;
b=jtqzeikBN0Ih8fIyW/SZQkFE41e9eJN8qCuHXlPRByQNix+YypmL+FnH33iLz6QGZg
Jf5a1IhE1ByBSzT5O10NJFV2vwmP24w66pOJkHZiUbsUZJUOo8NmUK7EBDWdN+9aLrJc
1cgU+NNUNZ/+emo8vsvfoptK/h+DWqsHD8N9tZM2AHdYKKeBLynpT9702wiTw64G6Gx+
5nQCUveAzW4+EGWUB83oqDNSv0tZNKf8ZgAvXJJCrU1okoyIkmVphmKlrVb5R+/1b62R
H9HGblu9+QwXiQPyr2ABLQ647a7322PJlLf+AN7BVKlbwXa+GxsxEQeggxhCBdf5kIK/
vSkw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531huf9ytang4tXZsyARYs4POHWxZ2nIVEUL9yU89ZYh6FrB9npE
xfgq+lYVrcxQ0RBUWoMFCseDNMszmR5gQJ+xTPs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8HEuwPv603cIGRZt0xItEQ/3tmbQIxTiDzQWm5QDhHVH9St8v2SAWdlhuzBVfosmvhb4957CWcfvlRLMC16M=
X-Received: by 2002:a63:7e11:: with SMTP id z17mr21173403pgc.114.1634013211716;
Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with
HTTPREST; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:31 -0700
From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 13 Feb
2021 16:00:01 +0200")
References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN>
<83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN>
<CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN>
<83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CADwFkmn84Lxr6d=x9nDuSd+j8U00XHHxjhyXwVStBG7vM+MBbw@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472
Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm@HIDDEN>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>,
46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes:
> The method of "recommendation" you propose is too strong for my
> palate, sorry. In general, I believe that people should be left to
> their devices unless what they do causes harm to others.
> Second-guessing other people under the assumption that we know better
> is something I don't like doing, and don't like others doing to me.
>
> How about adding some warnings to uce.el instead, either in the
> commentary or when the main entry point is invoked for the first time
> in a session?
Is this okay for emacs-28?
diff --git a/lisp/mail/uce.el b/lisp/mail/uce.el
index b07004de38..611181ca61 100644
--- a/lisp/mail/uce.el
+++ b/lisp/mail/uce.el
@@ -24,11 +24,53 @@
;;; Commentary:
;; The code in this file provides a semi-automatic means of replying
-;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get. Currently, it
-;; only works with Rmail and Gnus. If you would like to make it work
-;; with other mail readers, see the mail-client dependent section of
-;; uce-reply-to-uce. Please let me know about your changes so I can
-;; incorporate them. I'd appreciate it.
+;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get.
+
+;; -- !!! NOTE !!! --------------------------------------------
+;;
+;; Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively
+;; harmful.
+;;
+;; - You will confirm that your email address is valid, thus ensuring
+;; you get more spam. Spammers use tricks like getting you to reply
+;; and/or clicking unsubscribe links, etc. to confirm that you
+;; should stay on their lists.
+;;
+;; - You will leak information (e.g. on your email server and setup),
+;; thus opening yourself up for further attack. More importantly,
+;; they are likely to find your IP, thus your physical location (see
+;; "geolocation"), and by combining that data with your name it
+;; should be trivial to find e.g. your home address and phone
+;; number.
+;;
+;; - The sender address is likely fake. (For example, you might
+;; unwittingly participate in flooding someones mailbox. The
+;; abuse@domain and postmaster@domain is unlikely to be able to act
+;; on your reply.)
+;;
+;; - You open yourself up to various kinds of social engineering.
+;; This could be the first in a planned exchange where they will
+;; attempt to trick you to divulge sensitive information.
+;;
+;; - You confirm that the email landed in your inbox, and not the spam
+;; folder. This confirms to them that their current method of
+;; spamming is useful, and helps them continue.
+;;
+;; - Scammers have been known to threaten, intimidate, and use other
+;; forms of criminal manipulation. Be aware that replying to spam
+;; can lead down a path that you may not want to be on.
+;;
+;; Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not use this package.
+;; Use a spam filter instead, or just delete the spam.
+;;
+;; If you still want to use it, read on.
+;;
+;; ------------------------------------------------------------
+
+;; Currently, it only works with Rmail and Gnus. If you would like to
+;; make it work with other mail readers, see the mail-client dependent
+;; section of uce-reply-to-uce. Please let me know about your changes so
+;; I can incorporate them. I'd appreciate it.
;; The command uce-reply-to-uce, if called when the current message
;; buffer is a UCE, will setup a reply *mail* buffer as follows. It
@@ -204,6 +246,12 @@ uce-subject-line
"Subject of the message that will be sent in response to a UCE."
:type 'string)
+(defcustom uce-i-want-to-use-this nil
+ "Non-nil means that you don't want the warning message about this package.
+See `uce-reply-to-uce' for background."
+ :type 'boolean
+ :version "28.1")
+
;; End of user options.
@@ -218,7 +266,44 @@ uce-reply-to-uce
"Compose a reply to unsolicited commercial email (UCE).
Sets up a reply buffer addressed to: the sender, his postmaster,
his abuse@ address, and the postmaster of the mail relay used.
-You might need to set `uce-mail-reader' before using this."
+You might need to set `uce-mail-reader' before using this.
+
+-- !!! NOTE !!! --------------------------------------------
+
+Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively
+harmful.
+
+- You will confirm that your email address is valid, thus ensuring
+ you get more spam. Spammers use tricks like getting you to reply
+ and/or clicking unsubscribe links, etc. to confirm that you
+ should stay on their lists.
+
+- You will leak information (e.g. on your email server and setup),
+ thus opening yourself up for further attack. More importantly,
+ they are likely to find your IP, thus your physical location (see
+ \"geolocation\"), and by combining that data with your name it
+ should be trivial to find e.g. your home address and phone
+ number.
+
+- The sender address is likely fake. (For example, you might
+ unwittingly participate in flooding someones mailbox. The
+ abuse@domain and postmaster@domain is unlikely to be able to act
+ on your reply.)
+
+- You open yourself up to various kinds of social engineering.
+ This could be the first in a planned exchange where they will
+ attempt to trick you to divulge sensitive information.
+
+- You confirm that the email landed in your inbox, and not the spam
+ folder. This confirms to them that their current method of
+ spamming is useful, and helps them continue.
+
+- Scammers have been known to threaten, intimidate, and use other
+ forms of criminal manipulation. Be aware that replying to spam
+ can lead down a path that you may not want to be on.
+
+Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not use this package.
+Use a spam filter instead, or just delete the spam."
(interactive)
;; Start of mail-client dependent section.
(let ((message-buffer
@@ -358,7 +443,49 @@ uce-reply-to-uce
;; Run hooks before we leave buffer for editing. Reasonable usage
;; might be to set up special key bindings, replace standard
;; functions in mail-mode, etc.
- (run-hooks 'mail-setup-hook 'uce-setup-hook))))
+ (run-hooks 'mail-setup-hook 'uce-setup-hook)))
+ (unless uce-i-want-to-use-this
+ (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer-create "uce-reply-to-uce warning"))
+ (insert "-- !!! NOTE !!! --------------------------------------------
+
+Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively
+harmful.
+
+- You will confirm that your email address is valid, thus ensuring
+ you get more spam. Spammers use tricks like getting you to reply
+ and/or clicking unsubscribe links, etc. to confirm that you
+ should stay on their lists.
+
+- You will leak information (e.g. on your email server and setup),
+ thus opening yourself up for further attack. More importantly,
+ they are likely to find your IP, thus your physical location (see
+ \"geolocation\"), and by combining that data with your name it
+ should be trivial to find e.g. your home address and phone
+ number.
+
+- The sender address is likely fake. (For example, you might
+ unwittingly participate in flooding someones mailbox. The
+ abuse@domain and postmaster@domain is unlikely to be able to act
+ on your reply.)
+
+- You open yourself up to various kinds of social engineering.
+ This could be the first in a planned exchange where they will
+ attempt to trick you to divulge sensitive information.
+
+- You confirm that the email landed in your inbox, and not the spam
+ folder. This confirms to them that their current method of
+ spamming is useful, and helps them continue.
+
+- Scammers have been known to threaten, intimidate, and use other
+ forms of criminal manipulation. Be aware that replying to spam
+ can lead down a path that you may not want to be on.
+
+Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not use this package.
+Use a spam filter instead, or just delete the spam.
+
+Customize the variable `uce-i-want-to-use-this' if you do not
+want to see this message.
+")))
(defun uce-insert-ranting (&optional _ignored)
"Insert text of the usual reply to UCE into current buffer."
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Mar 2021 17:26:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 06 12:26:02 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38195 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lIaga-0000wW-BZ for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:26:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59362) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lIagY-0000wJ-AD for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:25:50 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42506) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lIagS-0006vL-Np; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:25:44 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3307 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lIagN-0003kY-NK; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:25:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2021 19:25:26 +0200 Message-Id: <83zgzgurcp.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <CADwFkmmX6tS1TSfsTJzmcw0mNE8vpS7otrL0c4VaBjvKe-CJaA@HIDDEN> (message from Stefan Kangas on Sat, 6 Mar 2021 11:14:13 -0600) Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> <1br1ku3eji.fsf@HIDDEN> <83sg5azkr3.fsf@HIDDEN> <CADwFkmmX6tS1TSfsTJzmcw0mNE8vpS7otrL0c4VaBjvKe-CJaA@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: rgm@HIDDEN, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) > From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> > Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2021 11:14:13 -0600 > Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes: > > > I don't see how our views on what is and isn't appropriate response to > > spam should be mandatory for the few users who may disagree. > > Moving this to obsolete/ does not make it mandatory for anyone to do > anything. It is not within our power to do that; one of the freedoms > granted by the GPL is to run the program for any purpose. Moving it to obsolete/ will make using it an annoyance. If I were one of those who for some reason use this package, I'd resent that move. What I resent when done to myself I prefer we don't do to others. > AFAIK, nowhere in the GPL, the GNU Manifesto etc. does it say that it is > contrary to the spirit of free software to make useless features > obsolete. That this feature is obsolete is one opinion. Even if that opinion is predominant, it doesn't mean different opinions aren't possible, let alone legitimate. It is IMO condescending to force our views on others. > > Is there any other, more modern method we support to respond to spam? > > Yes, I listed some of them in my previous reply. And I already said most of the above in my previous replies. But we are still arguing, for some reason that evades me. Bottom line: I find obsolescence to be inappropriate for this kind of situations. If we want to warn users against responding to spam, we should find a different way of doing that. Like we do with lib-src/movemail, for example. (For some reason, ISTR I already said that as well.)
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Mar 2021 17:14:22 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 06 12:14:21 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38182 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lIaVR-0000eu-NJ for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:14:21 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f41.google.com ([209.85.216.41]:46867) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1lIaVQ-0000ei-69 for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 12:14:20 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f41.google.com with SMTP id q6-20020a17090a4306b02900c42a012202so869831pjg.5 for <46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 09:14:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=X/GK9WjvqzOMjfyyM/iPgNu045M4nxmF0Pk3KWjREfM=; b=SSj0sCoEqtdnHRLjfqxL1Ibfk/N3aB82BxyLhf5kBIU00v1rq4+JT2hwtn3BR/wsq1 6rHCkGaSshqwXrli+q0DRjsTpFtokOA4xH++iXfqT4x6cHCrEvDys0x2I5W77jiHsrcm slZ3xF9KCCgSo2pEYEvOrjOxzdLYfZGvmON/F42Xcb1Ma5EPfKvpM41VCq4KcRG/ic73 gWvDzbrlOc+P71Dv1AO79+UtmtlP8/m9gOJF62p4jUcsRdYhowKAIwt6nguP9bqPZnmo Vu1ypXmZP6uYUlFkVkd3MPbChEgi7Rm6r5TJQZtHuWMv8lhEbF7sZNDFk0SKSbtuttv2 MgHw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532N3lii7jdBu1eVotDyBg7q/GhX76jvpXI9eQBwyHynbhtyY5b5 wgjUk72kN335DW++2DUU0rEVE0y0Xs4N1j8YKs88uF0izNs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTTqsi1s49nFoT98DeKpftztNNhLeulYOCufe7IsPfXU71mVRbVVT1LslaBvGUrvsU6lwRquvwea/xJj5hPSo= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c249:: with SMTP id d9mr16514491pjx.104.1615050854097; Sat, 06 Mar 2021 09:14:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 6 Mar 2021 11:14:13 -0600 From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <83sg5azkr3.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> <1br1ku3eji.fsf@HIDDEN> <83sg5azkr3.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2021 11:14:13 -0600 Message-ID: <CADwFkmmX6tS1TSfsTJzmcw0mNE8vpS7otrL0c4VaBjvKe-CJaA@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Glenn Morris <rgm@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes: > I don't see how our views on what is and isn't appropriate response to > spam should be mandatory for the few users who may disagree. Moving this to obsolete/ does not make it mandatory for anyone to do anything. It is not within our power to do that; one of the freedoms granted by the GPL is to run the program for any purpose. > This is free software, users are free to do whatever they want with > it. I can't see what this has to do with the principles of Free Software. AFAIK, nowhere in the GPL, the GNU Manifesto etc. does it say that it is contrary to the spirit of free software to make useless features obsolete. > Is there any other, more modern method we support to respond to spam? Yes, I listed some of them in my previous reply. Not that I understand why this is pertinent, as we have already established that doing that is useless and/or harmful.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2021 21:12:47 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 04 16:12:47 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60464 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lHvH5-00084x-G6 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:47 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51982) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHvH1-00084h-RU for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:46 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42099) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHvGw-0004Km-9l; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:38 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2319 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHvGs-00061u-HR; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:35 -0500 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 23:12:16 +0200 Message-Id: <83sg5azkr3.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Glenn Morris <rgm@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <1br1ku3eji.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Glenn Morris on Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:29 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> <1br1ku3eji.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: stefan@HIDDEN, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@HIDDEN> > Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:29 -0500 > > Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively harmful. > Emacs having a package to help you reply to spam is at best pointless, > but most likely actively harmful. Yes, Stefan already said that up-thread. I don't see how our views on what is and isn't appropriate response to spam should be mandatory for the few users who may disagree. This is free software, users are free to do whatever they want with it. Which is also something I already said, so I don't see why do we need to reiterate the same arguments without saying anything new. > This is one of the many things that makes Emacs look antiquated. Why "antiquated"? Is there any other, more modern method we support to respond to spam? > I find the refusal to even obsolete such things demotivating for working > on Emacs. So IMO the cost for keeping such things around is non-zero. I sympathize with your feelings, but feelings aren't limited to one side in a disagreement, and you are not the only one who finds this and similar disputes demotivating. Which is why I think we should try to stay technical and not emotional.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.
Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2021 19:27:56 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 04 14:27:56 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60276 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1lHtdc-0005Uc-FU
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:56 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56388)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <rgm@HIDDEN>) id 1lHtdb-0005UQ-44
for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:55 -0500
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39885)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from <rgm@HIDDEN>)
id 1lHtdV-0001TJ-Fa; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:49 -0500
Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82)
(envelope-from <rgm@HIDDEN>)
id 1lHtdB-0007xE-W8; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:31 -0500
From: Glenn Morris <rgm@HIDDEN>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete
References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN>
<83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN>
<CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN>
<83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-Spook: Taiwan Body scanner Bin Laden Cyber Command OTP Shayet-13
X-Ran: OYOq?q)*((yz7qVFV@W:dw"r%3f5\!=o5z[Dm<T6rlLqX"ra}{]'v*7\<n1@t}Yuz~-uFp
X-Hue: yellow
X-Attribution: GM
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:29 -0500
In-Reply-To: <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 13 Feb
2021 16:00:01 +0200")
Message-ID: <1br1ku3eji.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472
Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively harmful.
Emacs having a package to help you reply to spam is at best pointless,
but most likely actively harmful.
This is one of the many things that makes Emacs look antiquated.
I find the refusal to even obsolete such things demotivating for working
on Emacs. So IMO the cost for keeping such things around is non-zero.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2021 03:39:31 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 03 22:39:31 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57384 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lHepn-00047b-KR for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:39:31 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40098) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHepm-00047P-PA for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:39:31 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51078) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHepg-0005jq-Ma; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:39:24 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3783 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lHepg-00034k-2m; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:39:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 05:39:06 +0200 Message-Id: <83czwfk2p1.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <jwvh7lsorwg.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:22:16 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvh7lsorwg.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: stefan@HIDDEN, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> > Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:22:16 -0500 > > > What are the reasons for moving uce.el to obsolete/ ? > > I don't think it's useful to anyone. > Moving it to `obsolete` might let us discover that I'm wrong on this > point, of course ;-) I'm against this method of "discovery", sorry. This package doesn't require any maintenance, so let's not invent any maintenance for it. We have more important things to do with our time (I hope).
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.
Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Mar 2021 21:22:33 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 03 16:22:33 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57148 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1lHYwz-0005mg-5i
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:22:33 -0500
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:8793)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1lHYwx-0005mV-PL
for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:22:32 -0500
Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 31285441DF8;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:22:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D7373441DF3;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:22:24 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1614806544;
bh=FWnJu6sib1qBZOUeYNNWH14pY655W3f5rmVWErAIu0M=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From;
b=PpBhBnVuP62sLEkCiDxgYm9MH5Jcr6zoo9Ux3nqOfs4ARBKBFLEqSC3R/1I9gyGZD
inpTlPwVL9AHmjywZn5uTWU2xy3HGXsOMcOCTwihOdHJ6u5B0VvTInP2D7JF08ntYZ
4us7zn/VRPWApgl8dZZ01TVkJOSOZsnQtIL/WqBKN0NEoiep7+fKGbduWSlBU0jQfO
hNuJGsdAYPe2sqSP20ZUpwsuyahMLYFn/iVty0Dh2sOgsNeSQpn1PkVHiXHYrbyWp9
WUrp+kDVin1GeJ61Nqgj3KIv/J3QMb3BBxnyJMAUFfBm4Y4VuDVEOhM7xDojJMu3Gn
nj4W09olSpsFQ==
Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C099C1201E0;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:22:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete
Message-ID: <jwvh7lsorwg.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN>
<83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:22:16 -0500
In-Reply-To: <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 13 Feb
2021 09:58:51 +0200")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL -0.101 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472
Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>, 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>> So how about moving it to obsolete/?
You have my vote.
> What are the reasons for moving uce.el to obsolete/ ?
I don't think it's useful to anyone.
Moving it to `obsolete` might let us discover that I'm wrong on this
point, of course ;-)
Stefan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Feb 2021 14:00:13 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 13 09:00:13 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33858 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lAvT3-0003IM-0S for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:00:13 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39396) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAvT0-0003Gn-R8 for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:00:11 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49944) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAvSv-0004OX-4G; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:00:05 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4579 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAvSt-00037C-6e; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:00:04 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:00:01 +0200 Message-Id: <83mtw8cbku.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> (message from Stefan Kangas on Sat, 13 Feb 2021 06:25:19 -0600) Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> > Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 06:25:19 -0600 > Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > > But I think we should be equally free to (strongly) recommend against > bad practices. The method of "recommendation" you propose is too strong for my palate, sorry. In general, I believe that people should be left to their devices unless what they do causes harm to others. Second-guessing other people under the assumption that we know better is something I don't like doing, and don't like others doing to me. How about adding some warnings to uce.el instead, either in the commentary or when the main entry point is invoked for the first time in a session?
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Feb 2021 12:25:28 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 13 07:25:28 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33660 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lAtzM-00053d-E6 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:25:28 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f42.google.com ([209.85.216.42]:34246) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1lAtzK-00053N-6z for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:25:27 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f42.google.com with SMTP id my11so1341831pjb.1 for <46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 04:25:26 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3lz0aKaI7KukfbycogzUc+DzbRJvZeydc/mmuy+8XRc=; b=gromkUFvr/K0LYh5+HOpdsiALpwoWy9XH3Y1jEFCkYFRGx9uzYpNA99y2JVPR5HcHF z4/3b5kGZwpsER7zUEZUrBdxgZuqctaGJuo+cJy7LVYwDonOO1u8EqW/x42SKiPfNalj aeak/XtnYinvPPbW2jSF2i6enOkJqSXjkFLPQAiX/p50aWo3e/j2Cy9W+UJHQDkqj2M9 8fLB/zC1wEyRROqyVQn22eGe8e6/rnN0OIVrRb64tJbuqyrAEVcAw2PEeR+g7LqgeXf4 JiSnTqH5t3u4EImPhVnMfT7ZkkBahBF8Bc8eHxivKPNDjQLu27RCxr5e/oA99AsPwEUX pKjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mwo+FRBWCxYm9IUq9tTEqdthsUPKvtc8JFhJZPJdzzxAwTdEa TGT0MV2c7zodupSj4Sf1R2t364dXo0vI7IxLPDI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy7XaB9VWyk7NODR6B/HoogDYtb9Ks5qWIL2qYJslgcxStu8GQWwg8osgEv6f3nTAR+GnmFyTyaJAcnmztW8qY= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ee44:b029:e2:bb4a:9ffb with SMTP id 4-20020a170902ee44b02900e2bb4a9ffbmr6894606plo.39.1613219120254; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 04:25:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 06:25:19 -0600 From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 06:25:19 -0600 Message-ID: <CADwFkm=XPCv_3UTkK=2L66hj1-q-qM-2NtdtkUO5C3jvhWcw8g@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes: > What you say above was always true: replying to spam bears an inherent > risk. This didn't change in any way, so how will we justify > obsoleting this package now? I think the methods for dealing with spam has developed quite a bit since 1996, so I'm not quite sure I follow this argument. The justification is that no one should waste time replying to spam; they should use a spam filter. If you are looking for strictly technical reasons for obsoleting it, of course they exist too: Anyone that wants to reply to an email using pre-written drafts can do so using skeleton, tempo, abbrev, etc. Those are better tools that cover this use-case. > I don't think our personal opinions on which is or isn't useful > practices are reasons good enough to make it harder for others to use > those practices if they so wish. Whether or not replying to spam is good or bad is not really a matter of personal opinion; it is objectively bad. You can find any number of security and privacy experts that could explain why: - You will confirm your email address is valid, ensuring you get more spam. - Sender address is probably fake. (For example, you might unwittingly participate in flooding someones mailbox. The abuse@domain and postmaster@domain is also unlikely to be able to act on your reply.) - You open yourself up to various kinds of social engineering. - You might leak information (e.g. on your email server and setup). Encouraging this bad practice by shipping uce.el puts unknowing users at risk, and promotes a bad method of dealing with spam. We should instead discourage this bad practice by moving it to obsolete/. > It isn't our prerogative to tell others what to do or not to do in > these circumstances. Anyone would of course still free to continue doing whatever they want (for example by making a copy of the obsolete libary for their own use). But I think we should be equally free to (strongly) recommend against bad practices.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Feb 2021 07:59:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 13 02:59:02 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33504 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lAppW-0002OS-Es for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:59:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39482) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAppU-0002Nx-0s for 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:59:01 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAppO-0007hW-9T; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:58:54 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1975 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1lAppN-0008K7-8J; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:58:53 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 09:58:51 +0200 Message-Id: <83im6we6v8.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> (message from Stefan Kangas on Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:58:53 -0600) Subject: Re: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete References: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46472 Cc: 46472 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> > Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:58:53 -0600 > > ;; The code in this file provides a semi-automatic means of replying > ;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get. > > It sends an email to the sender, as well as the abuse and postmaster > emails for the senders domain containing a fairly polite request to be > taken off any lists. I think these days, it is pointless to reply to > spam, and no one is (or should be) doing it. It only verifies to the > spammers that your email is valid, which is useful information to them > and will do nothing but ensure you stay on their list. > > This seems like a relic from a more gentle and perhaps naive time of the > internet. Nowadays, people should not waste their time on doing that, > but instead use a spam filter. > > IOW, I think this library is useless these days. > > So how about moving it to obsolete/? What are the reasons for moving uce.el to obsolete/ ? What you say above was always true: replying to spam bears an inherent risk. This didn't change in any way, so how will we justify obsoleting this package now? I don't think our personal opinions on which is or isn't useful practices are reasons good enough to make it harder for others to use those practices if they so wish. It isn't our prerogative to tell others what to do or not to do in these circumstances. So my vote is against obsoleting this package, if the above reasoning is the only grounds for that.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Feb 2021 21:59:00 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 12 16:59:00 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33161 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1lAgSq-0000Pb-3h for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:59:00 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:56604) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1lAgSo-0000PT-0y for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:58:58 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49566) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1lAgSn-0000th-O0 for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:58:57 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:40598) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <stefankangas@HIDDEN>) id 1lAgSm-0005J7-4s for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:58:57 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f174.google.com with SMTP id z7so537985plk.7 for <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:58:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=0n4Wwg8dP0fEgY6g0eEw1aJjrtRi9ZiKjoqbINg0vJ8=; b=qqfp8FOjq3SXhd4hq8pZDEYOckHVQSx8xlvkE96FCwybnZElUGNqdmYK1JXcuMLLS9 vMExuzlDd3ILbhQr0OzqTKnytrHjrLgdBx+8DVLkhmtMo+7xTu64mDbz19cO6iImf7tP vx+GXSo2EtgcnkbLCJnMvLxwGNNIdPZm2wynYYvWtTrsC9hR3oTye6HQzL0ggvesKzZR 8SdGYNwSVVvLHh+npadxXefUkOOPBaibxErUiRwsgAcnIjHoXqdN0GUJ4WDdXIqOpZzK GrH3478wl09pE+o6OCgli77iurWHdjcS2GyWNNS1s4ohTDRMQCfwejWpPWZV8SDbMDMN KXPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533KZkQhMY2gK7D+gmP8Pb3S1uL06P5VeyEh/JJ1INPuRTML0ESB jkEaCCOByOcdl9l6JXGOWHmuZY/UoggLv+2Odb2VoEdQ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxNG5PhOdY2/l4z29OXegaQyGzR4rKsq4his0WGTgVZ98J5X9Ndqx2nVwlYOa2QQzOhMCraDR8DMvGqoya1Ju4= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:fe09:: with SMTP id ck9mr4545626pjb.175.1613167134494; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:58:53 -0600 From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:58:53 -0600 Message-ID: <CADwFkmnimeRjU+cdPRT57BrakjADnBBS0MCO471txQmExtHyZQ@HIDDEN> Subject: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete To: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=stefankangas@HIDDEN; helo=mail-pl1-f174.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) Severity: wishlist While digging around, I have happened upon lisp/mail/uce.el. Here is how it describes itself: ;; The code in this file provides a semi-automatic means of replying ;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get. It sends an email to the sender, as well as the abuse and postmaster emails for the senders domain containing a fairly polite request to be taken off any lists. I think these days, it is pointless to reply to spam, and no one is (or should be) doing it. It only verifies to the spammers that your email is valid, which is useful information to them and will do nothing but ensure you stay on their list. This seems like a relic from a more gentle and perhaps naive time of the internet. Nowadays, people should not waste their time on doing that, but instead use a spam filter. IOW, I think this library is useless these days. So how about moving it to obsolete/?
Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>:bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#46472; Package emacs.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.