On Thu, 8 Apr 1993 13:42:32 CET Thomas Zielke said:
 ...text deleted...
>b) I create a new list called HIST-DIG which is subscribed to a nearby
>   HISTORY peer, but is *not* a peer of HISTORY.     ...
 ...text deleted...
 
 I assume the "*not* a peer" is so that the European users aren't told
 that they must use the LISTEARN peers (which don't support 'DIGEST' as
 a subscription option)?  And also so that people requesting subscription
 to the Digest-by-default list won't be told to use a "closer" peer?
 The answer to the first question is probably "time to get rid of the
 LISTEARN peers".  Unless there are plans to extend LISTEARN to support
 the new LISTSERV features, it's going to be much easier just to move
 all the people to a LISTSERV peer.  On the second question, my guess
 is that your plan will work, but you'll have to train your HIST-DIG
 subscribers to send mail to the HISTORY list.  Otherwise you'll either
 end up with traffic in HIST-DIG that isn't in HISTORY, or worse yet,
 you'll try to subscribe both lists to each other and get a real mess. :)
 You could setup HIST-DIG so that only the HISTORY list could post to
 it, and add "reply-to" headers to direct responses to HISTORY be default.
 I've never done what you are proposing, but I think it would work.
 Just don't subscribe HIST-DIG to HISTORY.  You'll be setting up a
 one-way feed, from HISTORY to HIST-DIG.
 
 The only other option I can think of is for you (as the list owner) to
 use the ADDHERE command to put people on the Digest-by-default list.
 But then it's not automatted, and it would be easier for people to just
 subscribe to the regular list and "set history digest".
 
>Thomas Zielke
 
 -jj