Hi Jimmie,

I'm simply filtering BFAV messages by the < I'm a bug-fixing machine! > in
the body. A few messages might get placed wrong (such as this one which
isn't really a post from BFAV) but it seems to work very well in general.

Of course, a prefix might be easier to filter but machines are fast and
memory is plenty so what the hey ;-)

Cheers,
  - Andreas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org 
> [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On 
> Behalf Of Jimmie Houchin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 7:10 PM
> To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> Subject: BFAV email prefix?
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I've been creating multiple folders/mailboxes for my Squeak list 
> reading. That way I can keep up better with current conversations.
> 
> I have one for each [ENH] OR [GOODIE], [BUG] OR [FIX], and squeak-dev 
> (for all else).
> 
> I am seeing    < I'm a bug-fixing machine! >    messages with [ENH], 
> [FIX], [BUG][FIX] as Subject prefixes.
> 
> Would it be unreasonable to have the BFAV prefix its messages with a 
> [BFAV] or [BFAVg] (g=generated) Subject prefix or some such for its 
> generated messages?
> 
> This way I could easily filter them into their own mailbox without 
> resorting to filtering body text which consumes more time.
> 
> I think either a seperate list or Subject prefixes for any 
> automatically 
> generated emails would help all of us keep up with maintaining our 
> particular squeak-dev usage patterns. Somewhat similar to cvs commit 
> mailing lists.
> 
> I think a seperate list and prefixes would be nice, but not required.
> If a seperate list followup/replies could be set to squeak-dev.
> 
> Just some thoughts for discussion.
> 
> Jimmie Houchin
> 
>