Re: lynx-dev Version hides real subject in mailing list

[Michael Warner]

This has become, I reckon, off-topic for lynx-dev, so skip this
mail now, if you like, else I beg a brief indulgence.

Mutt can thread (subject to individual configuration) by
"In-Reply-To" &/or "References" header lines, if available.  If
none, it (also configurably) falls back to pseudo-threading
(sorting) by "Subject" line.  This pseudo-threading is what pine
(used to) do.  I haven't used a pine version more recent than a
couple years old, so that may have changed.

There seem to still be a few MUA's in use by list-members that
don't supply Refs or I-R-T lines, and mutt has a "reply_regex"
option to specify what to disregard at the beginning of the
Subject when falling-back thereto.  By default, it's (approx)
"^(re: )*", but for this list it needs to be something like
"^((re: )|(lynx-dev ))*". Just tested, and it seems to work, at
least with two messages "Re: <something>" and "Re: lynx-dev Re:
<same thing>" that didn't get threaded together previously.

All of which is by way of saying, I guess, that the "lynx-dev"
subject tag is a durn nuisance for me, since I filter the list
into it's own folder.  That *was* the rationale, I think - useful
for those who dump all their email into a single folder?

And even if the threading aspect is worked around, it still
usurps valuable space at the beginning of the Subject line, which
is related to David's point.  I don't suppose majordomo could
*append* rather than *prepend* the "lynx-dev" string?  I guess
I'll have to subscribe to list-elves if I want to pursue that.

Bela's suggestion to re-write the Subject line with procmail
would work, too, but the availability and/or intimidation factors
of procmail might be drawbacks.

On or about 18 Mar, 1999, David Woolley
<address@hidden> wrote:

> Here is a small sample of my incoming Lynx mail:
> 
>      49  Mar 16 Klaus Weide        (53)   Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.19 patch #
>      50  Mar 16 Michael Warner     (50)   Multiple command-line URL's (was: Re
>   N  51  Mar 16 David Combs        (35)   Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.19 patch #
>   N  52  Mar 16 David Combs        (67)   Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.19 patch #
>   N  53  Mar 16 David Combs        (63)   Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.19 patch #

        [...]

> Could you please re-arrange your subjects to ensure that the
> information in the subject comes nearer the front, if you want
> people to actually read them.  (It would probably be a good
> idea to reduce lynx-dev to lynx or [LYNX] - majordomo will
> leave out the former if lynx appears in the original subject.)

How about tacking on a trailing [lynx-dev], by hand, to get
rid of the list-server's leading one?  I think I'll start
doing that on new messages.  Not that I start many threads.

On or about 19 Mar, 1999, David Combs <address@hidden> wrote:

        [...]

> Here's a picture of the mutt listing of mails (I gave the command
> "o" (option) then "s" (sort by subject, cleverly):
       ^^^^^^<-((o)rder, actually)

Since it looks like you've got non-lynx-dev stuff in the
same folder, you might try "set sort=threads sort_aux=to",
if you haven't already.  That should group all the lynx-dev
stuff together, and not isolate subjects like 
"Changed Subj (was lynx-dev foo bar)"

>    1     Mar 15 Nathan Meyers   (  20) Re: (pizza) How about MACROS? (fwd)
>    2     Mar 16 address@hidden (  40) Re: (pizza) How about MACROS? (fwd)
>    3     Mar 10 Karl Heuer      (  14) Re: Am doing something really stupid.  
> BUT WHAT?
>    4   F Mar 15 To address@hidden (  63) How about MACROS?
>    5     Mar 19 address@hidden ( 101) Re: lynx-dev Lynx Problem

        [...]

> Or are you pleading with us PEOPLE on the list, asking
> US to write our subject lines in a mail-reader and
> screen-width-sensitive way?

I believe this was David's point.

        [...]

On or about 19 Mar, 1999, Bela Lubkin
<address@hidden> wrote:

        [...]

> Anyway.  Yeah, look at Mutt.  I haven't, yet, but I understand
> that it is quite flexible.  Now, mind you I'm only guessing,
> but I just bet it has the ability to mangle subject lines *in
> your mailbox*.  I bet you could instruct it to modify the
> subject lines of your lynx-dev mailbox before you ever see
> them, and keep them so modified.

Actually, AFAIK, no.  In most cases, the mutt developers adhere
pretty strictly to the "unix philosophy" of using the appropriate
external tool.  In this case, they'd say "Use [surprise!]
procmail".

Once again, sorry about rambling off on tangents.

-- 
Michael Warner          "You're cute when you're stupid"
<address@hidden>                                -- R.A. Miller