On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 07:07 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 11:10 +0000, Richard wrote: > > Thanks Andre > > Pete has answered my question. I've altered the sig block to include Evo > > version and OS, to aid future questions to the list > > Adding the Evo version to your sig is redundant, given that the info is > already in your mail headers if anyone wants to look. And if you use > this version to ask a question about a different version (say a later > one which isn't working for you), it's still not useful. Plus many > people don't even read sigs (I usually can't be bothered). > > What I'm saying is that if in future you ask an Evo question on the > list, it would still be a good idea to mention the version in the body > of the message. > > Cheers > > poc > > _______________________________________________ > evolution-list mailing list > evolution-list@gnome.org > To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
OK poc all noted, I'll play around with the block again -- Best wishes / 73 Richard Bown nil carborundum a illegitemis ######################################################################## Sent by Evolution 2.32.1 on Fedora FC14 x86_64 Dual core AMD Athlon 4400 Ham Call:G8JVM Maidenhead QRA: IO82SP38:LAT. 52 39.720':N LONG. 2 28.171 W (degs,mins ) QRV HF + VHF Microwave 23 cms:140W,13 cms:100W,6 cms:10W & 3 cms:5W ######################################################################## _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
