Morning Syafril Hermansyah,
No, no problem here.
Look I am sending this message to List and to you separate by comma
not semicolon.
Weird, whenever I add somebody to a recipient list, TB definitely puts a
semicolon in between. Of course I could put in a comma when adding
addresses
Hello Jast,
On Thursday, February 03, 2000 at 13:46:57 GMT +0100 (which was
03/02/2000 19:46 GMT +0700 my Local Time) you told to the list:
No, no problem here.
Look I am sending this message to List and to you separate by comma
not semicolon.
J Weird, whenever I add somebody to
Hello Jast,
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 13:46:57 +0100 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, February 03, 2000, 7:46:57 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Jast wrote:
Morning Syafril Hermansyah,
No, no problem here.
Look I am sending this message to List and to you separate by comma
not semicolon.
Morning Syafril Hermansyah,
A correction to the other message I sent before trying things out
correctly: TB *does* use only commas when sending out, even if you enter
semicolons manually or automatically :-)
--
.. Jast .
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :with The Bat! 1.41 / Beta1
Hi there!
On 3 Feb 00, at 16:57, Tony Boom wrote
about "Re: OT: Mailers that support MIME..":
(speaking about address separator: it should be comma, not semicolon by
RFCs)
J anybody else for trying it out?
Just tried it here, definitely a semi colon!
Yup... Then this bug is not
Hello Jast,
On Friday, February 04, 2000 at 18:21:14 GMT +0100 (which was
04/02/2000 0:21 GMT +0700 my Local Time) you told to the list:
J A correction to the other message I sent before trying things out
J correctly: TB *does* use only commas when sending out, even if you
J enter
Morning Alexander V. Kiselev,
Considering the other message here that said "TB is replacing semicolons
with commas upon sending messages" (I accidentally deleted the message
upon reading;-() -- I see no reason why shouldn't it *display* separator
as comma when adding the addresses from
Hello Thomas Fernandez,
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 14:22:02 +0800 GMT your local time,
which was Tuesday, February 01, 2000, 1:22:02 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Thomas Fernandez wrote:
Hi Roel,
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 05:41:53 +0100GMT (01/02/2000, 12:41 +0800GMT),
Roel wrote:
Saves on disk space?
Hi there!
On 2 Feb 00, at 9:34, Syafril Hermansyah wrote
about "Re: OT: Mailers that support MIME":
AVK TB performs;- ) Which makes me think that TB developers have
AVK borrowed a good bit from LookOut (just remember the address
AVK separator issue: _every_ other program
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 23:10:09 +0300, Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
Hi, this is already fixed, the current The Bat! I am using, use comma
to separate mail address. I don't know precisely since when, but 1.39
use comma (,) as address separator.
WOW Thanx for this swallow of fresh air!;-)
Hello Alexander V. Kiselev,
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 23:10:09 +0300 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, February 03, 2000, 3:10:09 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
Hi there!
On 2 Feb 00, at 9:34, Syafril Hermansyah wrote
about "Re: OT: Mailers that support
Morning Alexander V. Kiselev,
WOW Thanx for this swallow of fresh air!;-) I've been waiting for this fix
literally _for_years_!
Sorry, but this still isn't fixed actually.. I just tried it; still uses
semicolon. Syafril must have looked wrongly or maybe he has a totally
different
Hello Jast,
On Thursday, February 03, 2000 at 06:47:25 GMT +0100 (which was
03/02/2000 12:47 GMT +0700 my Local Time) you told to the list:
WOW Thanx for this swallow of fresh air!;-) I've been waiting
for this fix literally _for_years_!
J Sorry, but this still isn't fixed
\\\|///
/ ~ _ \
(- O o -)
--oOOo-(_)-oOOo---
Hello Thomas,
TF Saves on disk space?
not much (.7k /mail * 25000) but the main reason (as i stated before)
is the fact that tb! starts way faster
Hi there!
On 31 Jan 00, at 23:11, Paula Ford wrote
about "Re: OT: Mailers that support MIME digests":
So if a digest contains, say, 30 messages, you receive one mail message
with 30 attachments? This sounds tedious to deal with in any mailer.
Well no. I tested Pegasus in
Paula wrote:
PF Frankly, I don't understand why people prefer to receive the plain-text
PF digests, except that they don't know how to filter messages to folders.
PF So much easier to deal with separate messages, I think.
So I don't have the flapping bat all day. So I can check for email
I've found this thread informative, because I've never understood what a
MIME digest is and why Alexander is so hot for them. :)
I understand from what someone said that the Digest arrives as one
entity (is it a mail message or an attachment?), but that individual
messages can be selected for
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 20:15:08 -0500, Paula Ford wrote:
I understand from what someone said that the Digest arrives as one
entity (is it a mail message or an attachment?),
Yes, you get a single mail message with each message for the
particular day attached separately.
but that
On Monday, January 31, 2000, Allie Martin wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 20:15:08 -0500, Paula Ford wrote:
I understand from what someone said that the Digest arrives as one
entity (is it a mail message or an attachment?),
Yes, you get a single mail message with each message for the
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 22:22:57 -0500, Paula Ford wrote:
Yes, you get a single mail message with each message for the
particular day attached separately.
So if a digest contains, say, 30 messages, you receive one mail message
with 30 attachments? This sounds tedious to deal with in any
On Monday, January 31, 2000, Allie Martin wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 22:22:57 -0500, Paula Ford wrote:
Yes, you get a single mail message with each message for the
particular day attached separately.
So if a digest contains, say, 30 messages, you receive one mail message
with 30
\\\|///
/ ~ _ \
(- O o -)
--oOOo-(_)-oOOo---
Hello Paula,
PF Frankly, I don't understand why people prefer to receive the
PF plain-text digests, except that they don't know how to filter
PF
Hi Roel,
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 05:41:53 +0100GMT (01/02/2000, 12:41 +0800GMT),
Roel wrote:
PF Frankly, I don't understand why people prefer to receive the
PF plain-text digests, except that they don't know how to filter
PF messages to folders. So much easier to deal with separate
PF messages, I
Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Tuesday, February 01, 2000, Paula Ford wrote to Allie Martin about
OT: Mailers that support MIME digests [Was: Re: Digest Set-up]:
PF For a mailing list, I don't see how this would be much different than
PF receiving messages individually, then filtering them
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 14:22:02 +0800, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
Saves on disk space? - I receive only the single mails, and delete
them after 30 days - that's over 1000 mails. Very few mails are
marked as parked. If I do need anything else, there is always the
archive on the net. Why do you need
Hello TBUDL ,
"Mail from this mailing list will now be provided to you in digest form if
the list
administrator has enabled digest support."
When I requested to get the digest form the above sentence was in
the confirmation message. Who is the administrator? Me? I am the sole
user. If so how do
Hallo Marilyn,
On Sun, 30 Jan 2000 09:47:28 -0500 GMT (30.01.2000, 22:47 +0800 GMT),
Marilyn H. Pukmel wrote:
MHP When I requested to get the digest form the above sentence was in
MHP the confirmation message. Who is the administrator? Me?
To reach the administrator, see the rfc822 headers on
Hello list,
Sunday, January 30, 2000, 11:57:04 AM, you wrote:
lmtdc Sounds like you get all the message bodies placed together as
lmtdc one long message, i.e., the simple digest format. The disadvantage of
lmtdc this digest type is just what you're experiencing. Replying to an
lmtdc individual
Hi Allie,
On 30 January 2000 at 17:03:25 GMT -0500 (which was 22:03 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
If you had it MIME digest format, then each message would be
separate and then you would simply hit the reply button for the
message you wish to reply
29 matches
Mail list logo
