I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
------------------------------------------
Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
Devi Web Development
Devi.WebMaster@gMail.com
Hi,
In message "Re: subject line" on Mon, 3 Sep 2007 07:48:25 +0900, "Devi Web Development" <devi.webmaster@gmail.com> writes:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
It used to. But many claimed it's uncommon and inconvenient in the
English speaking community, so we abandoned long ago. If you start
discussion, and people accept the change, we'd love to make it back.
But we'd have to coordinate with list-news gateway at least, when we
change.
matz.
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.------------------------------------------
Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
Devi Web Development
Devi.WebMaster@gMail.com
Quoting http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/lkml/#s3-19 :
It would increase the size of the Subject: line. This is a problem, as it limits the amount of useful information that can be seen in the looking for interesting subjects.
Mail can easily be filtered based on the "To:" line. This list has too much volume not to be filtered (probably by everyone that uses it), so I don't see an advantage to adding [Ruby]. Further, I don't want to give up even six (really seven) characters that we can use to express ourselves. Thoughts?
Dan
Subject: line, making it harder to scan through a list of subject lines
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
One more reason for objection: Many people use the [LABEL] notation for
categorizing specific messages for things like announcements [ANN] and quizzes
[QUIZ].
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages?
No.
Dan
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's
a
fairly common practice on listserves.
Another "No" vote here. As mentioned: you can always let your e-mail app
filter the mails for you and if you need it, let it insert that [Ruby]
or whatever prefix.
Regards
Stefan
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
I disagree. I think today's mail clients *should* be expected to be able
to filter or tag on To:, Cc:, or List-Id:.
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 07:48 +0900, Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
Why not save yourself all that grief and use
http://groups.google.com/group/ruby-talk-google?hl=en
T.
On Sep 2, 3:48 pm, "Devi Web Development" <devi.webmas...@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
Hi,
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.
You can easily build the feature yourself when you like
it. <http://opensource.bertram-scharpf.de/sites/cropmail/>\.
list_ids = addrs_norm "List-Id"
if list_ids.any? or received =~ /\blists@bertram-scharpf\.de\b/ then
subject =~ /^ *unsubscribe *$/ and done
case list_ids
when "ruby-talk.ruby-lang.org" then
case body
when /\bLazaridis\b/i, /\bIlias\b/i then
done
end
# ---- here comes what you asked for
subj = headers[ :subject].first.sub /^(\s*re:)*\s*/i, "\\1 [RubyTalk] "
headers.replace :subject, subj
# ----
deposit "=linux/ruby-talk"
when "ruby-core.ruby-lang.org" then
deposit "=linux/ruby-core"
end
deposit "=spam-suspicion"
end
Bertram
Am Montag, 03. Sep 2007, 07:48:25 +0900 schrieb Devi Web Development:
--
Bertram Scharpf
Stuttgart, Deutschland/Germany
http://www.bertram-scharpf.de
I'm for it. It largely irritates me if there is no "tag" in the subject
line, since I have to parse the email more thoroughly to screen my messages.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yukihiro Matsumoto [mailto:matz@ruby-lang.org]
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 1:25 AM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: subject lineIt used to. But many claimed it's uncommon and inconvenient in the
English speaking community, so we abandoned long ago. If you start
discussion, and people accept the change, we'd love to make it back.
But we'd have to coordinate with list-news gateway at least, when we
change.
--
Phillip Gawlowski
for what it's worth, if you can filter yr emails by the "to" field,
they're all addressed to ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org and can be grouped
quite easily. at least via gmail for me. 
RSL
On 9/2/07, Dan Zwell <dzwell@gmail.com> wrote:
Devi Web Development wrote:
> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
> fairly common practice on listserves.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
> Devi Web Development
> Devi.WebMaster@gMail.com
>Quoting Index of /pub/linux/docs/lkml/ :
It would increase the size of the Subject: line. This is a problem,
as it limits the amount of useful information that can be seen in the
Subject: line, making it harder to scan through a list of subject lines
looking for interesting subjects.Mail can easily be filtered based on the "To:" line. This list has too
much volume not to be filtered (probably by everyone that uses it), so I
don't see an advantage to adding [Ruby]. Further, I don't want to give
up even six (really seven) characters that we can use to express
ourselves. Thoughts?Dan
I personally don't like a [Ruby]-tag in front of the subjects too.
I already have enough spam, don't need to spam the Mail itself...
I think most of relevant data is already in the Mail-Headers, don't need to add
stuff which isn't neccessary.
It's even more rubyish without tag, imho... 
Regards
Florian
Quoting Index of /pub/linux/docs/lkml/ :
It would increase the size of the Subject: line. This is
a problem,
as it limits the amount of useful information that can be seen in the
Subject: line, making it harder to scan through a list of
subject lines
looking for interesting subjects.Mail can easily be filtered based on the "To:" line. This
list has too
much volume not to be filtered (probably by everyone that
uses it), so I
don't see an advantage to adding [Ruby]. Further, I don't
want to give
up even six (really seven) characters that we can use to express
ourselves. Thoughts?Dan
I completely agree.
Just to mention it: I don't filter by the To header, I filter by the
X-ML-Name header, which is set to "ruby-talk" (much like your link to
kernel.org suggests).
Felix
Most people are not aware of the possibility to filter automatically
by mail headers other than Subject, To or CC (as suggested,
X-ML-Name == "ruby-talk" or List-Id == "ruby-talk.ruby-lang.org").
They sit and watch tons of Ruby-Talk mails filling their inbox
without filtering. They like to spend the day (or the evening)
manually tagging all mail with a special subject prefix like
"[Ruby-Talk]" and moving it to a folder, or, even better, read the
intersting ones and delete the others. It makes them happy and they
think, they had done a lot of work! They are scared of untagged
mail, because they could (or already have) inadvertantly delete
important inbox stuff trating it as mailing list stuff. That's why
they want the prefix.
- Matthias
On 03.09.2007 07:41, Stefan Rusterholz wrote:
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's
a
fairly common practice on listserves.Another "No" vote here. As mentioned: you can always let your e-mail app
filter the mails for you and if you need it, let it insert that [Ruby]
or whatever prefix.
Dan Zwell wrote:
Devi Web Development wrote:
I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
fairly common practice on listserves.------------------------------------------
Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
Devi Web Development
Devi.WebMaster@gMail.comQuoting Index of /pub/linux/docs/lkml/ :
It would increase the size of the Subject: line. This is a problem,
as it limits the amount of useful information that can be seen in the
Subject: line, making it harder to scan through a list of subject lines
looking for interesting subjects.Mail can easily be filtered based on the "To:" line. This list has too
much volume not to be filtered (probably by everyone that uses it), so I
don't see an advantage to adding [Ruby]. Further, I don't want to give
up even six (really seven) characters that we can use to express
ourselves. Thoughts?Dan
I usually find my self with 50-200 messages each day in my INBOX from this
mailing list alone. My solution? Is I set my webmail to display messages in
threads and colour code them. So that every message in my inbox from this
mailing lists address is displayed in a Red highlight and neatly organized. It
helps both with seeing that it. 0.) A Ruby-Talk message, 1.) Who said what,
2.) replies and deletes, and 3.) Makes it faster to work through the messages.
The A [Ruby-Talk] prefix would be nice if you use mailx as your primary MUA
but most these days should support decent sorting, filtering, and highlighting
features. And those are much more useful for dealing with Volume then
prefixing the subject lines. On the topic of filtering mails, there is no need
to filter by Subject Line for that -> Just use the other headers.
My primary mail system is www.ippimail.com using Squirrel Mail for the web
interface. Best thing I've used since I used to use Mutt but without the
annoyance of creeps sending me fat E-Mails to my server box!
TerryP.
--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of income to good causes. http://www.ippimail.com
Thoughts:
Not everyone filters ruby-talk into its own "folder" in a mail user
agent. Some of us prefer to have all incoming email appear in the same
inbox list, but want to be able to filter by eye.
Considering even the typical CLI-only terminal has an 80-character width,
I don't see how six characters is such a deal-breaker. There's something
wrong if people are sending 70+ character subject lines, anyway.
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 08:41:53AM +0900, Dan Zwell wrote:
Devi Web Development wrote:
>I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
>[RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
>fairly common practice on listserves.
>
>
>------------------------------------------
>Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
>Devi Web Development
>Devi.WebMaster@gMail.com
>Quoting Index of /pub/linux/docs/lkml/ :
It would increase the size of the Subject: line. This is a problem,
as it limits the amount of useful information that can be seen in the
Subject: line, making it harder to scan through a list of subject lines
looking for interesting subjects.Mail can easily be filtered based on the "To:" line. This list has too
much volume not to be filtered (probably by everyone that uses it), so I
don't see an advantage to adding [Ruby]. Further, I don't want to give
up even six (really seven) characters that we can use to express
ourselves. Thoughts?
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
MacUser, Nov. 1990: "There comes a time in the history of any project when
it becomes necessary to shoot the engineers and begin production."
So . . . are we somehow prevented from adding [ANN] after [RUBY]?
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 09:42:46AM +0900, Travis D Warlick Jr wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1Devi Web Development wrote:
> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
> fairly common practice on listserves.One more reason for objection: Many people use the [LABEL] notation for
categorizing specific messages for things like announcements [ANN] and quizzes
[QUIZ].
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Thomas McCauley: "The measure of a man's real character is what he would do
if he knew he would never be found out."
I don't think anyone was saying that MUAs shouldn't be expected to be
able to filter emails. The problem is that not everyone wants to filter
and organize emails the same way you do. Some people like having a
single inbox with easily recognizable markers for different mailing
lists. Your kink is not my kink.
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 11:40:54PM +0900, Arlen Christian Mart Cuss wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 07:48 +0900, Devi Web Development wrote:
> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
> fairly common practice on listserves.I disagree. I think today's mail clients *should* be expected to be able
to filter or tag on To:, Cc:, or List-Id:.
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
John W. Russell: "People point. Sometimes that's just easier. They also use
words. Sometimes that's just easier. For the same reasons that pointing has
not made words obsolete, there will always be command lines."
Hi,
Am Dienstag, 04. Sep 2007, 07:34:48 +0900 schrieb Bertram Scharpf:
Am Montag, 03. Sep 2007, 07:48:25 +0900 schrieb Devi Web Development:
> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
> fairly common practice on listserves.You can easily build the feature yourself when you like
it.subj = headers[ :subject].first.sub /^(\s*re:)*\s*/i, "\\1 [RubyTalk] "
headers.replace :subject, subj
Then, of course, you should remove it by hand every time you
hit the "Reply" button. I don't recommend it.
Bertram
--
Bertram Scharpf
Stuttgart, Deutschland/Germany
http://www.bertram-scharpf.de
Maybe because some of us *like* our MUAs. That was a fairly insensitive,
even offensive, answer. I hope you only meant that as a joke.
On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 04:01:56AM +0900, Trans wrote:
On Sep 2, 3:48 pm, "Devi Web Development" <devi.webmas...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's a
> fairly common practice on listserves.Why not save yourself all that grief and use
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Marvin Minsky: "It's just incredible that a trillion-synapse computer could
actually spend Saturday afternoon watching a football game."