NoOp wrote:
On 11/16/2009 06:18 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Harold Fuchs wrote:
<snips>
Well, I asked if Paul's contact is working on (a) or (b). This is what
I got on 15 Nov:
===== *un*edited quote ====
Harold, to be honest I'm hoping just to open lines of communication to
discuss the possibilities. There may be solutions that Collab may come
up that may resolve the angst which we may not have thought of.
I'm just putting forward the problem (people will be able to provide
additional detail on that problem when we have the right people
listening) for experts in the area to resolve.
==== end quote ====
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Harold, do you know if Paul's aware of the users-thread approach? And
I'm also interested in working on the various communications that are
involved in a number of these areas, many of which have
"almost-duplicate" content that I believe should be centralized and made
more accessible and maintainable. But I don't know the various
boundaries of how much is controlled by OOo and how much is controlled
by CollabNet, and therefore how much can be addressed without getting
into areas that have thus far been totally intractable.
The simplest & best solution IMO is to figure out a way to tag *all*
posts wiht a 'Delivered-To: moderator for [email protected]' with
'[MODERATED]' or '[UNSUBSCRIBED]' or similar in the Subject. List
subscribers have discussed attempts to filter on headers ad nauseum for
years.
We've also discovered that filtering on headers when the messages are
delivered via an nntp server such as gmane.org, nabble & others simply
does not work. Neither does filing bug reports apparently, see:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6286
[Auto-reply warning for users who are not subscribed to a mailing list -
Opened: Thu Jul 4 12:11:00 +0000 2002]
See the last 4 comments. Also notice that CollabNet Support made the
last two comments.
We now return you to your regular channel...
That seems to be saying that there would be no remaining problem if we
all knew whether or not the OP is subscribed. But there are plenty of
problems even where this is clear, and it still relies on the list
members to cc, or forward, or whatever, based on that flagging, wherever
a message might be in the thread. Passing the flag along as part of the
subject is not enough, they still have to know who the OP is to get the
message to him. People would also have to *not* cc a message's author
just because the flag is there, because the author might be subscribed
himself though the OP is not, which sends us back into the "who's
subscribed?" loop. There's also the fact that the flags could accumulate
when the OP (or another unsub, probably hijacking) responds within the
thread. That's why I'd far rather give the unsub a reasonable way to
look for himself, without any of this (IMO far from simple) process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
