From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/38437 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: message-subject-re Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:44:35 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Message-ID: References: <877kvm4e6k.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035174299 22366 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:24:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:24:59 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 14986 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 04:44:36 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (261@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2001 04:44:36 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 22247 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2001 04:44:57 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org Mail-Copies-To: never In-Reply-To: (Michael.Cook@cisco.com's message of "Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:50:02 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7 Original-Lines: 28 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:38437 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:38437 Michael.Cook@cisco.com wrote: > after seeing one too many subject lines that looked like > > Subject: Re: Fwd: FW: [list-name] RE: Fwd: foo > > it occurred to me that the Re prefix has no real value. Well, preserving all that without adding another Re: isn't a big improvement. Maybe it would be best to first strip away all Re:s, Fwd:s, and such, and then prepend a single Re:. So a response to the above would get "Re: [list-name] foo". Yes, the list tag should be preserved in outgoing messages, after the Re:. Otherwise, when it passes through the list manager, it'll come out like "[list-name] Re: foo", which breaks everything that expects to find an existing Re: only at the beginning. Such programs would then tend to add another Re: at the beginning, which exacerbates the problem we're trying to ameliorate. You might hide the tag from yourself when *viewing* messages, but when responding, it'd be nice to make things come out right for people who don't hide it. I think doing this might be rather nontrivial, though - when setting up the response buffer, Gnus would have to re-fetch the article to find the tag, if any. Or else it'd have to stash the tag somewhere (a buffer-local variable, maybe?) when removing it. paul