X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:43:50 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: about cyglsa.dll Message-ID: <20080326144350.GA16865@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <47dbffbd DOT 0b074e0a DOT 309b DOT fffff98d AT mx DOT google DOT com> <47DC0556 DOT 9080802 AT byu DOT net> <47EA40ED DOT 9080909 AT byu DOT net> <47EA48DE DOT 3030902 AT byu DOT net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47EA48DE.3030902@byu.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 07:00:14AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > Pasting .sigs verbatim is fair game (ie. if I'm dumb enough to post my own > email address in my .sig, that's my masochism, and I deserve what I get). It's fair game but, in the interests of a succinct discussion, there is absolutely no reason for this to show up in a response. Removing unnecessary bits from email that you are replying to (as I do here) is really a good idea. Adding the email address, subject, or other header information (with the exception of date) also just adds clutter to a message for no apparent gain. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/