On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 06:51:23AM -0600, Travis Pouarz wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:09 PM, Jack Repenning wrote:
>
> >
> > On Dec 26, 2008, at 1:25 AM, Chris Foote wrote:
> >
> >> To add more woe to this, it appears that attachments are totally
> >> removed from the emails when in the digest mode.
> >
> > Uh ... they should be, shouldn't they? I mean, in this particular
> > case where there's text being misstreated as attachments, it would
> > be nice to leave 'em in, but in general attachments within
> > "digests" would be bogus, right?
>
> No, it's not bogus. Digest users may well want to see the entire
> messages, but just receive them batched up as one large email message
> a day rather than 100 smaller ones. Removing attachments is,
> especially for a list like this one where they are used so
> critically, may well be the wrong thing to do. Giving Digest users
> the option to have attachments preserved or stripped would be seem to
> me a good thing to do since different digest users may have different
> objectives when electing the digest option.
I agree, this list is no use in digest mode if attachments like
patches and reproductions scripts are stripped off.
Stefan
Received on 2009-01-06 14:25:40 CET