On 16-05-05 07:13 PM, Ted Hess wrote:
> Ha! As a veteran top-poster and victim of Windows Live Mail when I
> respond sometimes, I take exception to your statement below. Of course,
Heh, I forgot about that (although Live Mail? They still have that?).
I hate having to Outlook for the same reason
clueless.
Feh!!!
/ted
ps - I top-posted this on purpose. ;)
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Dickinson
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 2:00 PM
To: David Woodhouse ; lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] List Prefix
It's like top-posting — there is a *correlation* betwe
On 16-05-05 01:37 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 13:23 -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
>> Basically the only people for whom your claim "it's easy to add" is
>> actually true is people for whom it's not *that* much harder to
>> remove what they don't want.
>
> In practice though
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 13:23 -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> Basically the only people for whom your claim "it's easy to add" is
> actually true is people for whom it's not *that* much harder to
> remove what they don't want.
In practice though, what happens is the more technically advanced users
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 13:22 -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> Hey, in future could you please not top-post? It's bad form on a
> technical list. While I'd hate see this become one of those
> self-righteous snob communities that use rude and antagonistic in
> response to things like top-posting, le
Hey, in future could you please not top-post? It's bad form on a
technical list. While I'd hate see this become one of those
self-righteous snob communities that use rude and antagonistic in
response to things like top-posting, letting people know that that
top-post is inappropriate is something
On 16-05-05 01:17 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Again, just personal anecdotal data. But again, it's a down-side that
> it's fairly hard for recipients to *avoid* (it's distinctly non-trivial
> to remove even the one list-noise, let alone when it's cross-posted and
> gains others), while it's relat
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 14:12 -0300, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> Come on. It´s not a big thing and it helps some people to organize
> their mailboxes in the way they prefer.
> We are talking about just 10 extra characters !
You are right. It isn't a big thing. It's just 10 extra characters.
But some
Well, it reminds some discussions about "what text editor is better?".
Nobody will convince anybody.
Exactly, it is not a clear win to avoid it.
Is it a "old-style" thing ? Maybe, but it is something real and used
of the majority of lists which people are used with and doesn't cause
any critical d
On 16-05-05 11:23 AM, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> Quick question to those who don't like the idea of having a prefix in
> the subject: Is this a big deal ?
> Cannot this be compromised in favour of having this enabled for those
> who need it for the reasons justified in previous messages ?
For me t
On 05/05/2016 06:15 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> But I'd observe that it's easier for people to *add* this nonsense on
> the client side of they really want it, than it is to *remove* it
> again. You're basically penalising those who *do* set up their mail
> clients optimally, for the benefit of th
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 12:23 -0300, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> Quick question to those who don't like the idea of having a prefix in
> the subject: Is this a big deal ?
Nothing's really a "big deal". Life's too short to claim that.
If I see messages where the subject appears to be 'lede-dev', when
Quick question to those who don't like the idea of having a prefix in
the subject: Is this a big deal ?
Cannot this be compromised in favour of having this enabled for those
who need it for the reasons justified in previous messages ?
Thanks
Fernando
On 5 May 2016 at 05:37, David Lang wrote:
> O
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 01:37 -0700, David Lang wrote:
>
> > can this be turned on by subscribers manually for their subscription or
> > is there only one global option ? for the list ?
>
> I'm pretty sure it's a list-wide option.
Indeed. There are plenty of things that individual subscribers can
On Thu, 5 May 2016, John Crispin wrote:
On 05/05/2016 10:14, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 08:13 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
Hi David,
some folks would prefer to have the prefix on the 2 lists. I just had a
look in the mailman settings and failed to quickly spot the location
wh
On 05/05/2016 10:14, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 08:13 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> some folks would prefer to have the prefix on the 2 lists. I just had a
>> look in the mailman settings and failed to quickly spot the location
>> where this can be achieved.
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 08:13 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> some folks would prefer to have the prefix on the 2 lists. I just had a
> look in the mailman settings and failed to quickly spot the location
> where this can be achieved.
Ick, they really ought to be able to handle that l
On 27/04/2016 10:47, John Crispin wrote:
>
>
> On 26/04/2016 18:51, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Tue, 2016-04-26 at 17:16 +0200, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>>> This is just a test, please ignore.
>>
>> Hm, I thought I fixed the stupid mailman default when I set up the
>> list, to remove the pointle
18 matches
Mail list logo
