Small request...

Robertson, Jason V
Wed Apr 15 08:53:00 GMT 1998

Yeah, actually that was the reason I requested it.  If I was still using
procmail or exmh I'm sure I could rig a filter that would work, but
unfortunately I've gone to the darkside and am now using Outlook 98.
Aliases seem to break its filtering.

Most other lists (well, many at least) do use the [listname] prefix and it
doesn't seem to cause any problems.

It's not too much of a problem - it only misses about 10% of messages, so if
people would rather not I guess that's the way it is.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jimen Ching [ ]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 4:06 AM
Subject: RE: Small request...

On Wednesday, April 08, 1998 10:02 AM, Guy Gascoigne - Piggford 
[] wrote:
> Could we NOT do this.  The answer to simpler filtering is use a mailer
> can filter correctly, not bung up the subject lines with stuff that can be
> deduced from other header fields.  Any combination of Sender, To or CC
> containing gnu-win32 should do the job.

I see many people opposing these requests, but I have yet to see a good
reason why it shouldn't be done.  Just because there are alternatives
mean it is a bad idea.  Second of all, filtering on 'Sender', 'To' and/or
'CC' doesn't always work because some people use aliases for the mailing
list address.  If you filter, you will miss these
messages.  Adding a keyword in the subject line in all messages distributed
by the mailing list will guarantee that the filter will trap it.

Why is it bad to 'bung up' the subject line?  What's so special about a
subject line that you shouldn't 'bung it up'?


For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"" with one line of text: "help".
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"" with one line of text: "help".

More information about the Cygwin mailing list