lschiere at pidgin.im
Fri Jul 20 08:25:45 EDT 2007
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:08:41AM -0400, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
> Hi, would it be possible to have an extra tag in the subject line for
> this mailling list?
> E.g. [pidgin-devel] <subject>
I am on a number of mailing lists that do this with the subject munging,
and a number that do not. In general, the more useful the list is, the
more annoying the subject munging is. That is because really useful
lists have real discussion happening on them, with more than a reply or
> all the other kids erm lists are doing it :p
No, they are not. This gets argued over and over again across the
> it just makes it easier to build filters (other then using the 'from' or
> the like) and it makes it easier to see in inbox's aswell.
> (If it's a user configureable option, why not make it the default choice?)
I do not believe that it *is* a user configurable option with mailman.
It would require far more processing before sending the email out to
make it one, so even if it is, I would be against enabling it.
Afterall, mailman would then have to not simply read the subscriber
list, but parse it into those that do and do not want subject munging,
and send each the email separately. Though a small cost, it would be
one that would add up. Further, it would break your own poor subject as
thread control handling, because some replies to the list would come
from those who munge and others from those who do not.
One of the more significant themes I saw in the arguments for this is
that "people are stupid, stupid people like this, so we should do it."
I do not buy that argument at all. In general, stupid people come to
this list for answer to a specific question or issue, and then they
leave. The people who are going to contribute are a step above the
masses. At least, those who are going to have the wit and wisdom to
write good code, understand pidgin & libpurple's existing code, and
understand open source enough to actually write that code instead of
just demanding it, *must* have enough spare brain cells to understand
that it costs them 2 minutes *once* (per list admittedly) to set up a
I would have left the subject munging in if the debate had gone that way
the first time, perhaps even the second time. But at this late date,
the 3rd or 4th time it has come up, I am not open to changing my
More information about the Devel