Several of my list owners are quite unhappy with the state of plain text digests in 2.1. Here's one comment sent to me this morning:
===== I must admit that until this post appeared I had not noticed that the messages were still numbered. Since the index is numbered, the number is really usefull for those who just want to scroll to specific messages. The number must be the first line, as it used to be, for the numbering to be of any value. (I mean, who looks to the 10th line of anything, to see if it's numbered?)
The reason why I asked about eliminating those five unnecessary lines of header is that they make it impossible for someone scrolling through the digest to easily spot the subject lines.
The latest Mailman may be wonderful in other respects, but this version might as well be numbered 1.0 as it takes several steps backward in digest presentation--by obscuring message numbers anbd subject lines. You can quote me.
And another:
===== The person at Mailman who came up with the brilliant idea to hide the number obviously is not a digest reader. More than half of our subscribers are, so this is a big concern.
It should be noted that they do like most of the other features in 2.1, but as they have a lot of digest subscribers this is generating lots of complaints.
When I get a chance later today I'll be trying the patch Tokio Kikuchi sent to mailman-developers - hopefully it will resolve the excess headers issue.
Thanks,
Bryan
"BF" == Bryan Fullerton <bryanf@samurai.com> writes:
BF> When I get a chance later today I'll be trying the patch Tokio
BF> Kikuchi sent to mailman-developers - hopefully it will resolve
BF> the excess headers issue.I'm off the net at the moment so I can't look at the patch, but I can guess what it does. If I'm right <wink> will it bother folks that reducing the number of headers in the plain text digest will also reduce the number of headers in the MIME digest?
One of my goals for the digester was that either digest could be burst and the individual messages would look exactly as if they had arrived independently. Or at least, they'd be useable to do follow ups back to the list. Maybe that's unreasonable for plain text digests. If so, the current code may need a more invasive surgery.
-Barry
Hi, Barry.
Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
No. I didn't touch the MIME part of the digester. Only plain text headers are reduced (and cofigurable in mm_cfg.py).
After I submitted the patch, I had a chance to review Scrubber.py. I think I have re-invented a scrubber with less capablity. Maybe we should use the Scrubber.py for plain text digests.
-- Tokio Kikuchi, tkikuchi@ is.kochi-u.ac.jp http://weather.is.kochi-u.ac.jp/
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 07:36 PM, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
Sounds fine for the general case as long as I can (preferably easily) customize my specific case to only display specific headers in a specific order. Which is what I have now with the patch from Tokio Kikuchi.
Bryan
"BF" == Bryan Fullerton <bryanf@samurai.com> writes:
BF> When I get a chance later today I'll be trying the patch Tokio
BF> Kikuchi sent to mailman-developers - hopefully it will resolve
BF> the excess headers issue.I'm off the net at the moment so I can't look at the patch, but I can guess what it does. If I'm right <wink> will it bother folks that reducing the number of headers in the plain text digest will also reduce the number of headers in the MIME digest?
One of my goals for the digester was that either digest could be burst and the individual messages would look exactly as if they had arrived independently. Or at least, they'd be useable to do follow ups back to the list. Maybe that's unreasonable for plain text digests. If so, the current code may need a more invasive surgery.
-Barry
Hi, Barry.
Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
No. I didn't touch the MIME part of the digester. Only plain text headers are reduced (and cofigurable in mm_cfg.py).
After I submitted the patch, I had a chance to review Scrubber.py. I think I have re-invented a scrubber with less capablity. Maybe we should use the Scrubber.py for plain text digests.
-- Tokio Kikuchi, tkikuchi@ is.kochi-u.ac.jp http://weather.is.kochi-u.ac.jp/
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 07:36 PM, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
Sounds fine for the general case as long as I can (preferably easily) customize my specific case to only display specific headers in a specific order. Which is what I have now with the patch from Tokio Kikuchi.
Bryan
participants (3)
-
barry＠python.org -
Bryan Fullerton -
Tokio Kikuchi