Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Even though multi-line Subject: is theoretically legal according to the > >> RFCs, it's certainly an awful idea; how many MUAs do you know that > >> provide more than one line to display the subject in a normal view? > >> So I don't really care if Majordomo truncates the subject --- I wouldn't > >> see the rest of it anyway. > > > Huh, but the MUA auto-unfolds it for view. Both mutt and Elm do that > > fine -- the folding and unfolding. I would think exmh is pretty > > thoroughly broken if it didn't. > > Well, if I actually choose to read the message, sure I'll see all of it. > The point here is that you've got one line (and only about 50 characters > at that) to get my attention, and so I'm perfectly fine with list > software that, erm, strongly encourages brevity of Subject: headers. > If you're composing a paragraph it ought to be in the message body, > not the subject. Have a look at how mutt displays the message index: 69 L Aug 23 Zdenek Kotala ( 37) Re: [PATCHES] Allow commenting of variables in postgresql.conf to - 70 L Aug 23 Bruce Momjian ( 52) ->Re: [PATCHES] Allow commenting of variables in Note that the rest of the second subject line could still use the same space as the line above it. I mostly don't use 80-line terminals to read mail anymore because there's so much stuff that's too wide. Subjects have already less space available because of those [FOOBAR] stuff that's prepended to it. (I noticed a couple of days ago that you strip those. Maybe I should do that too.) In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which corrects this bug? A patch at least? I mean, I can't be the only one complaining about it. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
