fedora-list Digest (really)

[Paul Howarth]

Ian Malone wrote:
> I recently subscribed to the subversion users
> list.  It's another (fairly) high volume list so
> I quickly changed to the digest.  Unlike fedora-list
> the digest comes in the form of a mail listing
> responses under each thread with the poster and
> number.  The mails themselves are attachments indexed
> by the number.  I can see two main advantages over the
> fedora-list digest format:
> 1. It is possible to actually reply to the mail
>    you are responding to.  This means threading
>    isn't broken for those who use it and saves
>    time spent on manually changing subject lines,
>    attributions, and quotations.
> 2. Fedora's numbered format has occasionally led me
>    to miss threads I've been following, only to find
>    them when I look at the archives (not often).  With
>    this format it seems easier to identify new threads
>    and spot ones of interest more easily.
> 
> They appear to be using a program called ezmlm.
> Here's a short sample of how one of these looks:
> Topics (messages 35321 through 35350):
> 
> Re: Subversion Newbie thoughts:  Database Backend, SQL, and the style?
>     35321 by: Christopher Ness
>     35348 by: John
> 
> Re: Recommendations on SVN, gForge....
>     35322 by: Dan Snider
>     35327 by: Dan Snider
> 
> Does anyone else think this format is more useful?
> What would it take to persuade Redhat to use it instead?

You can already do this. Change your list preferences to use MIME format 
digests.

Paul.