| |
[whoops, this time the Followup-To field is actually set to
lugnet.admin.general; I forgot to do that last time.]
In lugnet.cad.dev, talonts@vfaq.com (Tom Stangl, VFAQman) writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> > Taking crossposting into consideration, would you prefer to receive digests
> > on a per-group basis or for all groups you're subscribed to all rolled into
> > a single digest?
>
> I'd much prefer them on a per-group basis, even if it means some duplicates
> across several Digests.
OK. People receiving duplicates won't disrupt the ng's any, so if duplicate
messages aren't annoying to you, then they're not a problem to the server.
> > If there were News-by-Mail digests, are client applications smart enough to
> > extract and retain the headers of individual messages properly? I noticed a
> > few messages on the L-CAD mailing list a couple days ago which had really
> > annoying/confusing Subject lines such as:
> >
> > Subject: Re: L-CAD Digest - 5 Feb 1999 to 6 Feb 1999 (#1999-25)
> >
> > Worse (much worse), the 'References' headers on the messages weren't set to
> > Message-ID's of the original articles by the original posters, but instead
> > to the Message-ID's of the messages containing the digest segments.
> > Broken!! >%^E
>
> I know of no client at all that can handle Digests in the way you want. It
> is up to the Digest owner to modify the Digest output to do this. It will
> require HTML-only Digests to do so, AFAIK.
Well, there are add-ons to clients that do this: metamail, munpack,
formail, and dburst. I believe they require that the digests are sent out
in RFC 2046 format (MIME digests).
All right then, let's back up a bit. You said earlier that the "live feed
[of lugnet.cad.dev] [was] driving [you] nuts." What exactly drives you
nuts? It the fact that mail messages arrive to your inbox at random times
of the day (producing an audible noise or flagging you to read something)?
Or is it the fact that the messages come as separate messages instead of a
single message?
How acceptable would it be to you if the messages still came separately to
you, but were only sent out to you once a day -- in batches?
Another question. If actual digests happen, I would probably set the
outgoing headers like this:
From: news@lugnet.com (LUGNET Server)
Sender: news-gateway@lugnet.com
Errors-To: news-errors@lugnet.com
To: digest=lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com
Bcc: [addressee-list]
Subject: lugnet.cad.dev Digest 19990210 (10 Feb 1999)
Precedence: list
By design, this prevents anyone from replying to the digest message and
directing it back to the group. (Unless they tweak the 'To' header on their
reply.)
The incoming mail gateway could also be told to reject any message with a
subject line looking like it originated from a digest message.
So this is pretty slick for reading, especially if it's sent as a MIME
message. But how would people reply to messages? Well, I can only think of
one good way: Direct them to the web page. And this could be accomplished
very easily by including a line like
X-Message-Archive: http://www.lugnet.com/news/display.cgi?lugnet.cad.dev:93
in the header of each message in the digest. If the digests are sent as
plain text, then the URL will be clickable; if the digests are sent as MIME
messages, then the URL will probably be hidden since X-Message-Archive is a
nonstandard header. But the URL could also be placed below the message
header and before the body of the message.
Anyway.
How close would that get you to where you want to be? It probably would be
pretty easy to whip together.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: News-by-Mail digests
|
| (...) I'd much prefer them on a per-group basis, even if it means some duplicates across several Digests. (...) I know of no client at all that can handle Digests in the way you want. It is up to the Digest owner to modify the Digest output to do (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
