Actually, Charlie interpreted the original question correctly. It would be a bit much to notify subscribers when there was no digest. Once I got the digest-timing issue settled, I was going to recommend to the subscribers that they check the archives if they were concerned they had missed something, much as David had suggested. BTW, the reason that I was trying to set up a regular digest-delivery is that after managing Listserv lists for years, I was hoping to carry over a digest feature that I liked. On Listserv the digests are generated when they trigger the size limit, but there is also a daily default digest-clearing time as well. It might result in a small digest, but no one seems to mind. linda
Thank you for explaining further, Linda. It seems that SmartList determines the age of a waiting digest queue by the arrival time of the oldest message in it rather than by the issue time of the previous digest. I can see arguments for both methods and have to conclude that for some lists it's the age of the oldest undigestified article that should count, while for others it's the age of the previous digest issue. The decision of which matters more -- how long an article has been sitting or, now that at least one new article is queued for a digest issue, how long digest-mode readers have been waiting -- *has* to differ from list to list. Ideally the criterion should be selectable for each list by its listowner; is a new Boolean in rc.custom called for?
participants (2)
-
David W. Tamkin -
Linda Wack