3 ms·
What you call debugging output frequently isn't really debugging output - it's frequently a bunch of convoluted text that says 1 of 2 things, in 90% of cases: a
by fredoliveira 15y ago
What you call debugging output frequently isn't really debugging output - it's frequently a bunch of convoluted text that says 1 of 2 things, in 90% of cases: a) target email doesn't exist; b) your email was too large, dummy
The text can and should be improved and be void of HTML shiny - the mail client itself could parse the new, slimmer, standard error text and make it pleasing.
- dholowiski 15y agoAs somebody who administers an exchange server I see dozens of different types of failure messages and they are incredibly useful for troubleshooting. Lets please not dumb them down. As somebody who spent 13 years doing tech support I can tell you that the vast majority of users don't read error messages no matter how shiny or well written they are.
- scott_w 15y agoThe problem isn't the failure messages per se, it's the failure messages regarding user error. If the user has made a mistake somewhere, the client should try to understand the error message and, if it's user error (email address doesn't exist, attachment too big), it should suggest solutions to the problem in a language the user can understand. If the system itself has an issue, the client should provide enough information to tell the user either: a) How they can resolve it b) How they can contact whoever needs to resolve it