[Baypiggies] Reply Courtesy

[Ross Parlette]

Cory,

You got it. Sorry, digest is right.

The digest generator presumably has some size cue to generate a digest and 
start accumulating for a new one. When the initial message quoted the entire 
previous digest as a "tail," that generated a digest. Since each of the 
responders and re-re-responders failed to remove the long quote, each 
re-re-reply generated a digest too too too.

I'm replying to the list as I got 3 replies for clarification, one from GvR. 
I don't post here often and I'm sorry I was so opaque when I did.

When I reply to the digest, I don't see the digest quoted. Not sure why, but 
that's a good thing.

ross (not to be confused with Rossum)

-----Original Message-----
From: "Cory Omand" <coryomand at gmail.com>
To: Guido van Rossum
Cc: "Ross Parlette" <ross at pcnt.com>, baypiggies at python.org
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 20:08:33 -0800
Subject: Re: [Baypiggies] Reply Courtesy

> On 12/14/06,  Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Um, what do you mean by a summary?
> 
> I assumed that summary == digest.  I agree that it's not the best
> practice to reply on a mailing list digest and keep *all* of the
> digest in the reply :).
> 
> - C.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/baypiggies/attachments/20061215/72f0c815/attachment.htm