[tlug] Posting Limits

[Jim <jep200404@example.com>]

Josh's letter begs the questions: 

   What size letters are appropriate to post on TLUG? 
   What kind of attachments are appropriate to post on TLUG? 

Josh wrote: 

> [Jim wrote:]
> > Please screen scrape (copy and paste) to report the results.

> Or better yet, since this is likely to produce *a lot* of output, 

Specifically: 

   [jep@example.com rh9]$ wc rpm-qa
       795     795   14943 rpm-qa
   [jep@example.com rh9]$

Which is bigger than your 13.5KB post of: 

   Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 20:28:27 +0900
   Message-id: <d8fcc0800601150328g1e2d7e99q@example.com>

Gzipping the output would significantly reduce the size: 

   [jep@example.com rh9]$ gzip <rpm-qa | wc
        27     141    6485
   [jep@example.com rh9]$

which even with base64 bloat would be significantly smaller 
than Botond Botyanszki's tarball of: 

   Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:58:20 +0100
   Message-id: <20060118125820.2ff84c26@example.com>

Which raises the policy question of how much is appropriate 
for posts to tlug. The closest thing I can find is in the first 
paragraph of http://www.tlug.jp/listpolicy.php#postq: 

   Define your problem and attach logs whenever possible so 
   that it is easier for others to diagnose the problem.

Which doesn't mention size limits, or attachment types. 

> post the output to: ... [somewhere on the web] 
> ... and just send us the link.

That would be fine. Let the discussion begin about how much 
is appropriate to post, and at what threshold someone should 
put the big stuff elsewhere on the web and just publish the 
URL for it on TLUG. I've been in favor of keeping mailing 
list posts short and sweet, so I probably should not have 
asked someone else to post so much stuff on TLUG. 

Also, what kind of attachments are appropriate? 
I assume that animated GIFs of smiley faces are frowned upon. 

Jim