Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 14:00 -0400, George Reeke wrote: > Please do not turn digests off.  Although I do not use > them on lists like this one, where I participate, I find them very > useful on other lists where I just want to keep up a bit and would > rather not be bothered with all the individual

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 12:59 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > And to get this back on topic a bit.  We still haven't heard from > > anyone who uses digests as to why they prefer to use them. > > IIRC at least one digest user mentioned that s/he only sometimes read > mails from lists, which actually

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 11:26 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > Patrick, what was the result of your tests about moderating replies to > digests? So far no-one has replied to a digest so the question is still open. I'm tempted to think that a lot of people are just archiving digests and not reading them,

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 11:26 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > It's so bad that, as others have said, it has now become the > "standard" in business circles to top post and include absolutely > everything from the message they are replying to What I dislike a little bit are HTML formatted private mails

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

Off-topic: Something about _real issues_, one issue by it's nature affects Evolution, too. An issue for the iOS MUA is that it seems not to support plain text, instead it does enforce multipart and the plain text of the multipart is without automatic line breaks. IIRC all web interfaces, at

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

> > Maybe, I don't know, but more common is that users have the choice, to > _not_ add the quoted messages as an attachment, so usually only the > cursor position might be on top. It's entirely down to the users - Outlook is perfectly capable of doing things, err, "properly", but users

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 03:56:04 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: >Sorry, I don't really have a solution for you. Perhaps someone else can >think of something. I'm neither using digest, nor do I often use a mobile device to read mails. As you already pointed out, a solution would be to have a

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 10:19 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 02:34:26 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: > > (and preferably *not* top posted, although I have sadly given up on > > that...Thanks Microsoft Outlook and Gmail and Yahoo mail) > > When I needed to use Outlook express (I

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 10:08 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > You also might ask, why using POP instead of IMAP. Speaking for me, I > want to locally store mails, to read them off-line, as well as having my > own mail archive. Offline IMAP for several reasons is no option. You've said this a number of

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 10:19 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 02:34:26 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: > > (and preferably *not* top posted, although I have sadly given up on > > that...Thanks Microsoft Outlook and Gmail and Yahoo mail) > > When I needed to use Outlook express (I

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 10:08 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 02:34 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: > > I fail to understand the difficulties of setting up separate > > mailboxes, (or mail folders), on ANY platform, but I set up my mail > > filters server-side. > > Hi, > I'm

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 02:34:26 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: >(and preferably *not* top posted, although I have sadly given up on >that...Thanks Microsoft Outlook and Gmail and Yahoo mail) When I needed to use Outlook express (I never used Outlook), I wasn't forced to top post. I have got

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 02:34 -0600, Anton W. Schenker wrote: > I fail to understand the difficulties of setting up separate > mailboxes, (or mail folders), on ANY platform, but I set up my mail > filters server-side. Hi, I'm still not against disabling digest, I only want to explain the

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 14:45 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:20:39 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: > > I try to only use open source applications for my email reading,  > > Evolution, K9 on Android and Pine on Linux over ssh. > > > > My point which you missed is that Evolution

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 11:46 +, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 02:31 +0100, Ángel wrote: > > On 2017-03-16 at 00:44 +, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > > Even if we assume this is a reliable way to catch replies to digests, > > > there is nothing in the Mailman admin

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 01:10 +0100, Ángel wrote: > On 2017-03-13 at 12:25 -0700, Brewster Gillett wrote: > > So for example, if I fetch my current traffic, and my "Evolution" > > folder shows three new > > messages, and I'm too busy to tend to them at the moment, I just > > ignore them; every

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 02:31 +0100, Ángel wrote: > On 2017-03-16 at 00:44 +, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > Even if we assume this is a reliable way to catch replies to digests, > > there is nothing in the Mailman admin interface to specify filtering > > criteria, other than a) non-membership

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On 2017-03-16 at 00:44 +, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > Even if we assume this is a reliable way to catch replies to digests, > there is nothing in the Mailman admin interface to specify filtering > criteria, other than a) non-membership of the list, or b) message body > is too large (40k

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On 2017-03-13 at 12:25 -0700, Brewster Gillett wrote: > So for example, if I fetch my current traffic, and my "Evolution" > folder shows three new > messages, and I'm too busy to tend to them at the moment, I just > ignore them; every subsequent > time I open Evolution, that reminder will still

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 01:22 +0100, Ángel wrote: > On 2017-03-14 at 09:54 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > > If digests are kept, are other mitigations possible. Like: > > > > Is there a way to enforce mime digests? > > > > And is there a way to make the boilerplate at the top of the > > digest

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On 2017-03-14 at 09:54 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > If digests are kept, are other mitigations possible. Like: > > Is there a way to enforce mime digests? > > And is there a way to make the boilerplate at the top of the > digest more "robust" on the issue of replying to a digest? > >

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:20:39 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: >I try to only use open source applications for my email reading, >Evolution, K9 on Android and Pine on Linux over ssh. > >My point which you missed is that Evolution is not available >everywhere, and expecting everybody to be able to

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 09:20 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: > On 13/03/17 05:53 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 16:04 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: > > > Is there an Evolution client for Android? Not all email reading is done > > > in Evolution. > > > > Why do you need

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On 13/03/17 05:53 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 16:04 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: Is there an Evolution client for Android? Not all email reading is done in Evolution. Why do you need an Evolution for Android? I read my mail on Linux with Evolution, on other

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 09:54 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > If digests are kept, are other mitigations possible. Like: > Is there a way to enforce mime digests? Not to my knowledge. > And is there a way to make the boilerplate at the top of the > digest more "robust" on the issue of replying

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 18:01 -0400, George Reeke wrote: > On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 21:56 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > If a lot of users actually should use digest, then digest shouldn't be > > dropped. If just a few users should actually use digest, it doesn't > > make sense to keep it, as long

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

> > > > As far as I have ever seen, those numbers in parens after each > > folder bear no relationship to whether I have read the messages > > or not. Maybe this is because I mostly read them in the preview > > window and don't double click on them to read them in their own > > window? The

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 18:01 -0400, George Reeke wrote: > On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 21:56 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > If a lot of users actually should use digest, then digest shouldn't be > > dropped. If just a few users should actually use digest, it doesn't > > make sense to keep it, as long as

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 21:56 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > If a lot of users actually should use digest, then digest shouldn't be > dropped. If just a few users should actually use digest, it doesn't > make sense to keep it, as long as at least not one person really needs > digest for a good

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 21:56 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > IMO it would be useful to know how many users receive digest for this > mailing list and want to continue using digest. As to the first part of that question, the admin interface for Mailman shows the digest flag per user, but AFAIK there

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 16:04 -0400, Krzysztof Adamski wrote: > Is there an Evolution client for Android? Not all email reading is done > in Evolution. Why do you need an Evolution for Android? I read my mail on Linux with Evolution, on other platforms with the Google webmail, on my Android phone

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

Workflow related arguments pro and con disabling digest lead to nothing. Indeed, we are not always using Evolution. While tablet PC MUAs often don't provide good folder and filter options, they usually default to one inbox with mails sorted by threads. The broken threads caused by digest users

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On 13/03/17 03:32 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 18:00 +, Pete Biggs wrote: Why should we eliminate digests? 1. I know of no-one who still uses dial-up UUCP for their mail feed. Even a basic "always-on" Internet service is orders of magnitude faster

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

> Brewster replies: > > George, I'm not sure you're fully utilizing Evolution's capabilities. > When I fire up Evolution, I see my > entire list of folders, first thing. So I don't understand your > phraseology "look in all those other folders > to see if something has arrived". I have dozens

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 18:00 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > > > > Why should we eliminate digests? > > > >1. I know of no-one who still uses dial-up UUCP for their mail feed. > > Even a basic "always-on" Internet service is orders of magnitude > > faster than a Hayes modem so the

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

> Pete Biggs wrote: > > So filter them into a different folder so they don't clutter your > > inbox. I am a member of numerous mailing lists - not a single one > > appears in my inbox, they all end up in their own folder. (For > > efficiency, I do it on my server, but it's no different to doing

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

Quoting Ralf Mardorf : there could be reasons to prefer digest. You already mentioned one of those reasons, a "broken" Internet access. Actually I can't remember that I really ever needed digest, especially not for this mailing list. Ditto. I get what they are for ...

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:05:32 + Pete Biggs wrote: > So filter them into a different folder so they don't clutter your > inbox. I used to do that, but I then found that I rarely looked at them, and when I did, there were far too many emails to read. A daily summary straight

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 18:05 +, Pete Biggs wrote: > > I already sent this reply to the previous thread but am repeating > > it here for the record, with an added sentence: > > > > Please do not turn digests off. Although I do not use > > them on lists like this one, where I participate, I

Re: [Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

Hi, there could be reasons to prefer digest. You already mentioned one of those reasons, a "broken" Internet access. Actually I can't remember that I really ever needed digest, especially not for this mailing list. Sometimes replies to digest could be really annoying, OTOH such replies aren't

[Evolution] Proposal: to eliminate the digest option for the Evolution mailing list

Hi all I'm one of the list moderators for the Evolution list. Occasionally new users on signing up for the list select the "Digest" option for receiving list traffic. What's a Digest? Digests are an ancient mechanism for batching list messages into a daily briefing, with a view to reducing the