echoposts

echoposts

[Maxym Synytsky]

Hello, all!
Can someone tell me, is it possible:
1. To prevent echoposts from being sended to the original sender; and
2. To exclude the address, which is in the list, but was already included in the 
original post, so that this post came only one time?

If these things aren't already implemented, then I'd like to treat 'em as 
feature requests.

Thank you,
Maxym Synytsky.

Re: echoposts

[Mads Martin Joergensen]

* Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> [Dec 14. 2004 11:27]:
> Hello, all!
> Can someone tell me, is it possible:
> 1. To prevent echoposts from being sended to the original sender; and

What's an echo post?

> 2. To exclude the address, which is in the list, but was already included 
> in the original post, so that this post came only one time?

 To: somelist@somewhere.com
 Cc: foo@bar.example.com

So in case foo@bar.example.com is subscribed to the list, you want to
strip the Cc:?

-- 
Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk                           BÅK!
"Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic
 and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?"
                                -- A. P. J.

Re: echoposts

[Maxym Synytsky]

Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:

> * Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> [Dec 14. 2004 11:27]:
> 
>>Hello, all!
>>Can someone tell me, is it possible:
>>1. To prevent echoposts from being sended to the original sender; and
> 
> What's an echo post?
For example, when I posted previous message to this mailing list, it came back.
And this one will return, obviosly. :)
Such messages are called echoposts in Ecartis.

> 
>>2. To exclude the address, which is in the list, but was already included 
>>in the original post, so that this post came only one time?
> 
> 
>  To: somelist@somewhere.com
>  Cc: foo@bar.example.com
> 
> So in case foo@bar.example.com is subscribed to the list, you want to
> strip the Cc:?
Well, no. Stripping Cc: won't help, because the message to foo@bar.example.com
is already sent. I'd like mlmmj to send such post to somelist@somewhere.com
minus foo@bar.example.com, in case foo@bar.example.com exists in
somelist@somewhere.com .

Re: echoposts

[Christian Laursen]

Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> writes:

> Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:
> 
> > * Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> [Dec 14. 2004 11:27]:
> >
> >>Hello, all!
> >>Can someone tell me, is it possible:
> >>1. To prevent echoposts from being sended to the original sender; and
> > What's an echo post?
> For example, when I posted previous message to this mailing list, it came back.
> And this one will return, obviosly. :)
> Such messages are called echoposts in Ecartis.

If the sender doesn't receive his own posts you'll start getting questions
about why messages aren't getting to the list.

> >> 2. To exclude the address, which is in the list, but was already
> >> included in the original post, so that this post came only one time?
> >  To: somelist@somewhere.com
> >  Cc: foo@bar.example.com
> > So in case foo@bar.example.com is subscribed to the list, you want to
> > strip the Cc:?
> Well, no. Stripping Cc: won't help, because the message to foo@bar.example.com
> is already sent. I'd like mlmmj to send such post to somelist@somewhere.com
> minus foo@bar.example.com, in case foo@bar.example.com exists in
> somelist@somewhere.com .

I never saw the logic in that and find it irritating when I subscribe to
lists with that behaviour. You end up with only one message, yes, but in
the wrong folder. So when you search for something in the folder for that
list it isn't there but in the inbox instead.

-- 
Christian Laursen

Re: echoposts

[Morten K. Poulsen]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 01:16:56PM +0200, Maxym Synytsky wrote:
>> So in case foo@bar.example.com is subscribed to the list, you want to strip
>> the Cc:?
>
> Well, no. Stripping Cc: won't help, because the message to
> foo@bar.example.com is already sent. I'd like mlmmj to send such post to
> somelist@somewhere.com minus foo@bar.example.com, in case foo@bar.example.com
> exists in somelist@somewhere.com .

It might not be a problem, but if I wanted everyone to know that I didn't like
something mmj did (just an example ;) I could make he didn't get the post. I
could send the mail to the list with

To: mlmmj@mmj.dk
Cc: mmj@mmj.dk
Subject: mmj's patch sucks

but only deliver it to the list (envelope-to). The list has no way of knowing
that mmj never got the mail.

Morten

-- 
Morten K. Poulsen <morten@afdelingp.dk>
http://www.afdelingp.dk/

Re: echoposts

[Maxym Synytsky]

Morten K. Poulsen wrote:

>>Well, no. Stripping Cc: won't help, because the message to
>>foo@bar.example.com is already sent. I'd like mlmmj to send such post to
>>somelist@somewhere.com minus foo@bar.example.com, in case foo@bar.example.com
>>exists in somelist@somewhere.com .
> 
> It might not be a problem, but if I wanted everyone to know that I didn't like
> something mmj did (just an example ;) I could make he didn't get the post. I
> could send the mail to the list with
> 
> To: mlmmj@mmj.dk
> Cc: mmj@mmj.dk
> Subject: mmj's patch sucks
> 
> but only deliver it to the list (envelope-to). The list has no way of knowing
> that mmj never got the mail.
I see. Yes, this can be a problem.

Re: echoposts

[Maxym Synytsky]

Christian Laursen wrote:

>>> To: somelist@somewhere.com
>>> Cc: foo@bar.example.com
>>>So in case foo@bar.example.com is subscribed to the list, you want to
>>>strip the Cc:?
>>
>>Well, no. Stripping Cc: won't help, because the message to foo@bar.example.com
>>is already sent. I'd like mlmmj to send such post to somelist@somewhere.com
>>minus foo@bar.example.com, in case foo@bar.example.com exists in
>>somelist@somewhere.com .
> 
> I never saw the logic in that and find it irritating when I subscribe to
> lists with that behaviour. You end up with only one message, yes, but in
> the wrong folder. So when you search for something in the folder for that
> list it isn't there but in the inbox instead.
With folders this is only the matter of right filter.

Re: echoposts

[Mads Martin Joergensen]

* Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> [Dec 14. 2004 15:16]:
> >I never saw the logic in that and find it irritating when I subscribe to
> >lists with that behaviour. You end up with only one message, yes, but in
> >the wrong folder. So when you search for something in the folder for that
> >list it isn't there but in the inbox instead.
>
> With folders this is only the matter of right filter.

Getting rid of duplicates is only a matter of the right filter as well.

-- 
Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk                           BÅK!
"Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic
 and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?"
                                -- A. P. J.

Re: echoposts

[Christian Laursen]

Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> writes:

> > I never saw the logic in that and find it irritating when I
> > subscribe to
> > lists with that behaviour. You end up with only one message, yes, but in
> > the wrong folder. So when you search for something in the folder for that
> > list it isn't there but in the inbox instead.
> With folders this is only the matter of right filter.

Not really.

The mail sent directly from the other person will not contain the headers
best suited for filtering mail from the list.

-- 
Christian Laursen

Re: echoposts

[Maxym Synytsky]

Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:

> * Maxym Synytsky <synytsky@uz.gov.ua> [Dec 14. 2004 15:16]:
> 
>>>I never saw the logic in that and find it irritating when I subscribe to
>>>lists with that behaviour. You end up with only one message, yes, but in
>>>the wrong folder. So when you search for something in the folder for that
>>>list it isn't there but in the inbox instead.
>>
>>With folders this is only the matter of right filter.
> 
> Getting rid of duplicates is only a matter of the right filter as well.
There is a difference, because in the case of echoposts I'm getting unwanted mail.