Per-user subject prefix setting
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/1ce2848c5592ffc8805dc57580d5b7a1.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
A frequent request on mailing lists without a subject prefix is to add one. This often leads to long debate threads about the utility of the prefix. There seems to be two different styles of processing mail that leads to this conflict. One style (which I use) is to filter mail into many folders, one per list. No tag is needed in this case. The other style is to dump all mail into one or a small number of folders, and in this style one needs to tag to know which list a message belongs to.
This has been captured in this feature request:
<https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=350103&aid=1104433&group_id=103>
There seems to be limited code for customizing messages per-user, but this setting may want to be treated as some kind of user "class" setting so that messages can still be batched for the no-prefix class and the add-prefix class. Perhaps this could be implemented as two distinct queues, similar to the way digests are treated as a distinct queue.
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Kenneth Porter wrote:
<https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=350103&aid=1104433&group_id=103>
There seems to be limited code for customizing messages per-user, but this setting may want to be treated as some kind of user "class" setting so that messages can still be batched for the no-prefix class and the add-prefix class. Perhaps this could be implemented as two distinct queues, similar to the way digests are treated as a distinct queue.
It's probably easier than that. It's more like some digest users getting MIME digests and some getting plain.
As I see it, what would need to be done is to remove the prefixing from CookHeaders and have SMTPDirect split the recipient list and make two copies of the message, one which gets prefixed and delivered to the 'prefix' list and the other doesn't get prefixed and gets delivered to the 'no prefix' list. It might be better to have CalcRecips do the list splitting, but the idea is the same.
There would have to be some list default which would presumably apply to new members. Recipients who get the post because of 'regular_include_lists' might get the list default or get a prefix based on their 'included list' setting - another argument for splitting the list in CalcRecips.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
participants (2)
-
Kenneth Porter
-
Mark Sapiro