httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Taylor" <ch...@x-bb.org>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] Re: Administrivia question: subject prefix?
Date Fri, 30 Aug 2002 13:38:38 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have a copy of the original (well I think it is anyway) by Ken Coar
(list Admin) who states:

"This is apparently useful for some people who use mail agents that
have
trouble sorting on other fields in the header.  And the
noise/annoyance
to the people who don't have this problem would seem to be less than
the
current pain for those who do."

I can't find a prior reference or anyone with a problem (but equally
I'm not going to read the 1000-odd emails I've got in this folder) so
I'm a bit confused. Although I voted "no" to the change, I have
stated (and still will) that it doesn't bother me either way. I was
just wondering who actually HAD a problem, and why?

I don't want to kick up a fuss, I'm just wondering what the issue was
in the first place :)

Chris Taylor - chris@x-bb.org - The guy with the PS2 WebServer -
http://www.x-bb.org/chris.asc

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "DL Neil" <PHPml@DandE.HomeChoice.co.uk>
To: <users@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Re: Administrivia question: subject
prefix?


> Chris,
> I cannot answer your question, not having a copy of the original
> proposal/invitation nor being party to the rationale leading up to
> that move. I didn't request the move, but did exercise my
> invitation to 'vote'.  
> 
> Like I said: I'm a (reluctant)piano player - don't shoot! There
> seems to be room for misunderstanding - both the reasons for the
> proposal and the content of discussion since. I RESPONDED only to
> the suggestion that there was a technological solution and the
> implication that "a" solution could be assumed/described to be
> universal, with a listed proof/reality showing that it wasn't the
> case. (anyone who has read the RFCs for email and who has tried to
> work towards producing an 'advanced' but 'universal' product - and
> not all WebAdmins have (or need to), will know that email
> serving/list admin is by far a more tricky/less standardised/more
> bastardised/'re-interpreted' field, than our own) Email servers are
> not particularly consistent in their interpretation of the RFCs,
> and (versions) client software is a 'standards' minefield. I don't
> argue that the MS implementation is good/better/best. I defend only
> the facts, not the list membership/ListAdmin decision/my own choice
> in that!
> 
> Usual disclaimers: I use MS products for reasons beyond my
> control/because that's how I get paid. I don't find the obvious
> advice/jaundiced reaction to MS products helpful (even if it
> 'agrees' with mine). 'Good' decisions that fail to realise value
> under MS products are not (IMHO) suitable for a mixed membership
> group (such as ours). Demonstrating that one (non-Apache)
> technology is superior to another has no place on this list/in its
> management (even when I support the view!)
> 
> In following the various contributions on this subject, you will
> have noted non-technological reasons/preferences. I understand the
> straw poll has closed/decision has been made. There may yet be some
> discussion about the actual [label].
> 
> Regards,
> =dn
> 
> 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > So was this added to aid filtering in OL or OE?
> >
> > I use both (OE more) and my filter for this list is based on all
> > emails being "To or CC" or "From" users@httpd.apache.org, and
> > er.....this works fine :)
> >
> > So, if this was done as an aid to OE or OL, I'm somewhat
> > confused. 
> >
> > Chris Taylor - chris@x-bb.org - The guy with the PS2 WebServer -
> > http://www.x-bb.org/chris.asc
> >
> > - ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "DL Neil" <PHPml@DandE.HomeChoice.co.uk>
> > To: <users@httpd.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 11:09 AM
> > Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Re: Administrivia question: subject
> > prefix?
> >
> >
> > > Scott,
> > >
> > > > Robert Andersson wrote:
> > > > > My opinion on the new subject prefix, is that it is little
> > > > > uglier,
> > > little
> > > > > messier, little less width, little hard to (manually)
> > > > > search the
> > > subject,
> > > > > but not too bad; I'll live. Still interested, though, as
> > > > > Greg, as to
> > > what
> > > > > people and/or software had problems with filtering.
> > > > I think none. Looking again at DL Neil's post regarding
> > > > Outlook Express, I think the "All" option means search all
> > > > headers, which would work. I saw that it's possible in
> > > > Outlook. I haven't heard any other email clients mentioned as
> > > > not being able to do this. And the server-side[1] filtering
> > > > solutions I've seen definitely can.
> > > ...
> > > > different places. Doing filtering on the client side would
> > > > drive me nuts.
> > >
> > >
> > > Think again! (don't shoot me, I'm only the (reluctant) piano
> > > player) Your last statement applies to all those on the list
> > > who don't also run their own email servers, and certainly to MS
> > > users (see below).
> > >
> > > Like you, I latched onto "All" as "all headers" and thinking
> > > that thereby led the road to salvation, but we're both/all
> > > being way too logical ! [sarcasm alert] Herewith a private
> > > exchange between another list-member and myself on the subject
> > > (NB subsequently I have been corrected by an OL user, that
> > > recent versions of OL have 'extra' filters cf OE - I can't say
> > > whether they are helpful or merely 'bloat').
> > >
> > > With regrets,
> > > =dn
> > >
> > > > > > Thank you for the information - perfectly true for a
> > > > > > 'decent' email
> > > > system.
> > > > > > However MS-Outlook/Outlook Express users are limited to:
> > > > > > >From line
> > > > > > Subject line
> > > > > > Message body
> > > > > > To line
> > > > > > CC line
> > > > > > To or CC line
> > > > > > Message has priority, from specific account, size,
> > > > > > attachment, secure;
> > > > or
> > > > > > 'All' (an interesting 'filter'!?)
> > > > >
> > > > > try "all"
> > > > > it is not very selective, but I doubt there would be any
> > > > > confusion if
> > > you
> > > > used
> > > > > users@httpd.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > Hah! That's what I thought, 'all (headers)', but no, Mr
> > > > Microsoft has to have a 'different' approach. This is what it
> > > > would look like:
> > > >
> > > > Apply this rule after the message arrives
> > > > For all messages
> > > > Move it to the Apache folder
> > >
> > > that is the craziest thing that Mr Bill has ever come up with !
> > > (ok, ONE of the
> > > craziest !)
> > > >
> > > > - hence my comment about it being an interesting 'filter'!?
> > >
> > > Arghhhhhh
> > >
> > > > You don't have to be nuts to work with MS products - but it
> > > > helps!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the thought,
> > > > =dn
> > >
> > > you are welcome.
> > > *****
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---- - The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache
> > > HTTP Server Project. See
> > > <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> > >    "   from the digest:
> > > users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional
> > > commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org 
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use
> > <http://www.pgp.com> 
> >
> > iQA/AwUBPW9J4Cqf8lmE2RZkEQI43wCffWz/2PSIRKxn2+4yr85qCGrXc3wAn3aZ
> > WEXTzhHQM8gli8PCRJQ6nVeo
> > =Pxv+
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP
> > Server Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html>
> > for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> >    "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> - The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server
> Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more
> info.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
>    "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPW91Wyqf8lmE2RZkEQIJFQCfRFHqMuBaJHtzmpc789IV8xMCthgAoO6c
P67O6xLKplVAzAhg9h31PM0B
=U2kE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
   "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message