On 08.02.13 22:29, Will Yardley wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:17:26PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
>
> > If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> > updated from...
> > Subject: ...thread...
> > ...to...
> > Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
>
> > I'm aware mail filters are readily available to some. I'm suggesting
> > it because the prefixed subject line model is very prevalent these
> > days, particularly with mailman, and would further hazard the
> > suggestion that as such it should be considered a reasonable standard
> > worth implementing.
No, it is not considered reasonable here, I think you'll find.
Though present on a number of lists, I have encountered the <list-name>
subject line pollution on only one other list. It was soon removed,
after community objection. (AFAICT. I implemented a procmail filter to
remove the pollution from mails received here, but have read on the list
that it is no longer sent.)
> Given the number of threads on here about getting *rid* of those things,
> I doubt there will be a lot of enthusiasm for this suggestion on this
> mailing list.
+1
> That said, you should check out '$index_format' in the muttrc man page
> -- if the list is defined properly, you should already see (with the
> default index format) the mailing list name in your index already, so
> even if you're not filtering, it should be pretty obvious what mailing
> list the message was sent to.
Beatifully parried, Will. With recipients disinclined to sort their mail
able to have their cake and eat it too, there is no longer any pretext
on which the one can reasonably impose on the community to make up for
personal lack of effort.
Erik
(Who has 20 incoming mailboxes, and 1138 mailboxes for sorting after
reading.)
--
One man's constant is another man's variable.
- A.J. Perlis
