On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Paul Howarth wrote:
Ian Malone wrote:I recently subscribed to the subversion users list. It's another (fairly) high volume list so I quickly changed to the digest. Unlike fedora-list the digest comes in the form of a mail listing responses under each thread with the poster and number. The mails themselves are attachments indexed by the number. I can see two main advantages over the fedora-list digest format: 1. It is possible to actually reply to the mail you are responding to. This means threading isn't broken for those who use it and saves time spent on manually changing subject lines, attributions, and quotations. 2. Fedora's numbered format has occasionally led me to miss threads I've been following, only to find them when I look at the archives (not often). With this format it seems easier to identify new threads and spot ones of interest more easily. They appear to be using a program called ezmlm. Here's a short sample of how one of these looks: Topics (messages 35321 through 35350): Re: Subversion Newbie thoughts: Database Backend, SQL, and the style? 35321 by: Christopher Ness 35348 by: John Re: Recommendations on SVN, gForge.... 35322 by: Dan Snider 35327 by: Dan Snider Does anyone else think this format is more useful? What would it take to persuade Redhat to use it instead?You can already do this. Change your list preferences to use MIME format digests.
That gets the messages as attachments, but it doesn't thread them. Threading does sound like a pretty cool feature.
Paul.
-- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
