XEmacs-Announce August 1999

xemacs-announce@xemacs.org

4 participants
4 discussions

XEmacs-Patches list problems 23 years, 9 months

XEmacs Team

To all people who have send patches to the XEmacs Patches list and have not had feedback. The XEmacs-patches(a)xemacs.org list is the entry point for all contributions to the XEmacs source and/or packages. It is "moderated" by a bot that checks whether the messages actually contains a patch. The normal procedure after send a patch to this address is as follows: 1. Immediately you will get a message from the bot confirming the receipt of the patch. 2. The patch is archived at www.xemacs.org. 3. Either 3.a.1 You will receive a message that your patch has been Checked & Approved for inclusion, followed by 3.a.2 A message confirming the patch has been applied to the CVS. or 3.b. A message telling you the patch has been rejected and why (normally with suggestions for improvement). However, it has been discovered that the bot had a configuration error that dropped some patches on the floor after sending out the automated confirmation messages. This problem as how been rectified. If you have send a patch to XEmacs-patches(a)xemacs.org and hear nothing except for the automated replay then please do so again. We apologize for the inconvenience. Please be advised, however, that we are not able to give refunds. P.S. Now what I have your attention, let me point out that the ideal patch contains - A short description of the problem solved. - A ChangeLog entry (c.f M-x add-change-log-entry) included literally (not as a diff). - A unified diff (diff -u) of the changed file, made from the toplevel XEmacs directory. This greatly simplifies the jobs of the patch reviewers and appliers.

1 participants
0 comments

XEmacs 21.1.6 "Big Bend" Released 23 years, 10 months

Vin Shelton

1 participants
0 comments

XEmacs documentation binaries available 23 years, 10 months

Jason R Mastaler

XEmacs documentation "binaries" suitable for printing and on-line viewing have been placed in: <URL:ftp://ftp.xemacs.org/pub/xemacs/docs/> The following documents are available in Postscript, DVI and PDF (with permuted indices) formats for both US Letter and A4 sized paper: o Programming in Emacs Lisp, an Introduction (emacs-lisp-intro) o XEmacs Internals Manual (internals) o XEmacs Lisp Reference Manual (lispref)* o Getting Started With XEmacs (new-users-guide) o XEmacs Users Manual (xemacs) * Updated for XEmacs 21.1 Thanks to Darryl Okahata and Kazuyuki IENAGA for these beautiful documents.

1 participants
0 comments

Re: E-mail abuse report (was: Stuff Your Mailbox With $600 Checks...) 23 years, 10 months

SL Baur

With the exception of xemacs-announce, all other XEmacs mailing lists are open to submissions from non-subscribers. Occasionally, an idiot will send SPAM to them. Please check the headers very carefully before complaining to tux.org. I would strongly suggest using a procmail recipe along the lines of (using xemacs-beta as an example). :0 w: * ^Return-Path:.*xemacs-beta(-request)?＠ * ^TOxemacs-(announce|beta)＠ xemacs-beta.spool This has all filtered all SPAM sent to xemacs-beta for me. It drops Bcc'ed mail, but it is very rude to send Bcc'ed mail to mailing lists anyway. Followups to me or Jason or xemacs-beta, please. TUX ORG Abuse Tracing <abuse(a)tux.org> writes: > This message was sent via an open relay in Korea by its original sender, > whose traces do not remain in this message. It is unlikely that zzn.com > had anything to do with this message. TUX.ORG's only involvement is that > we host the xemacs-beta mailing list, which was spammed, and to which you > were presumably a subscriber. We have anti-spam countermeasures in place, > but there is no reliable defense against spams that are sent via > third-party relays. > I would suggest you complain to the operator of the Korean host about their > open relay, and see if they can find out from their logs who actually sent > the message: > ns.hanyon.co.kr [203.231.147.1] > Jason and Steve, could you send out another reminder to your subscribers > that they have subscribed to open-post mailing lists and that they should > not blame TUX.ORG when these lists get spammed? > Thanks, > David C Niemi > abuse(a)tux.org

1 participants
0 comments

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

XEmacs-Announce August 1999