From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 423 invoked from network); 9 Oct 1997 09:51:16 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 9 Oct 1997 09:51:16 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA21953; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 05:33:08 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 05:33:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Andrew Main Message-Id: <199710090933.KAA20641@taos.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Archiving patches (Was: Current state of 3.1.2) To: mason@primenet.com.au Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 10:33:44 +0100 (BST) Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu In-Reply-To: from "Geoff Wing" at Oct 9, 97 05:53:32 am X-Loop: zefram@tao.co.uk X-Headers: in preparation X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"B4y2J.0.yM5.KJAFq"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3566 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Geoff Wing wrote: >Downside: lazy/ignorant people don't remove Cc: lines so you get lots of > followups which aren't always relevant, and you can't just weed out > messages which reference other valid patches because they may be > patches too. Then you get lots of people who won't put proper > Subject lines on when the topic changes. Do what the NoCeM standard requires: any message whose Subject: line starts with "Re:" doesn't count. If in looking for patches one looks for "Subject: *PATCH:", then replies to patches won't be inadvertantly matched. -zefram