Re: [Evolution] Glean Outlook snapshots for ideas

[Kevin Cullis <kevincu orci com>]

OK, not only was I clueless but short on time, but not on trying to get
ideas to the Evo team.

Yep, after I did the CNTL-T I learned something new about my bad babit. 
Shame on me.  But I like the attitude I saw below.  Sometimes us users
get some busy "being productive" that we don't or aren't allowed to take
time to learn something new. Thanks for the comments though, I did take
the time this time.

This issue also relates to other bad habits/features that can be a
problem.  A while back I did my normal bad habit of getting an idea and
wanting to send it to the Evo team I clicked on a Evo list and "replied
to list" without realizing I had hit the hackers list, not the discuss
list.  I got scolded, and rightfully so, and proceeded to modify my
habits a little.

Where my bad habits come into play is adding (or not) email addresses to
my contact list, at least so it seems, that might be considered by the
Evo team.  When I normally add email addresses (right click on email
address), if there are similar addresses, such as Evo-Discuss and
Evo-Hackers, there is little to differientiate the two and I end up with
two "contacts" for Evo.  Is there the possibility for Evo to be "smart"
in the address to add it to the same contact, i.e. 


evolution lists ximian com

evolution-hackers lists ximian com

I'm not an admin person, but is the above admin naming habit normal for
lists?

Or, can I right click to "Copy the email address" instead of "Add to
Contacts" and open up Evo's contact and add it to the other Evo email
addresses?

Does this help some?

Thanks.

On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 02:08, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 23:28, Not Zed wrote:
> > I think the "Glean Outlook snapshots for ideas" subject is sufficient to
> > differentiate it from the original thread.
>
> I suppose it's feasible for Evolution to _notice_ a clueless user
> replying to a thread and then changing the subject. Upon attempting to
> send a message with In-Reply-To but no _("Re: ") in the subject line, it
> could do something like...
>
>   -------------------------------------------------------------------
>   | You have replied to a message but changed the original subject. |
>   | Do you mean your message to be a continuation of the same       |
>   | thread or to start a new thread?                                |
>   |                                                                 |
>   |  -New thread-  -Same thread-   -Explain-   -Don't ask me again- |
>   -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I do precisely this for my mailing lists -- messages with References or
> In-Reply-To but no 'Re:' are trapped for moderation, and usually
> rejected. Likewise messages with 'Re:' but no references.