* Manoj Srivastava
| You missed the point by a lot. OK, here it is all speeled out:
No, I didn't. I told you that gnus has a way around it. Which isn't
perfect, but quite good. And of course it's a hack and a workaround -
I am not saying that setting reply-to on a mailing list is the
On 03-Jan-2001 Philip Brown wrote:
Reply-to is meant to send a message back to the person who wrote the
first one, not to someone they wrote the message to.
reply-to is meant to direct where you should send replies to.
Reply-To is meant to direct where you should send replies to
if you
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 07:02:47PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
i would recommend the use of either testing or unstable or stable
depending upon the particular requirements of the situation.
stable is good when you don't need or want any change at all.
testing is good when you want/need to
It is unstable. Get over it.
*PLONK*
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:12:56PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, D-Man wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
mutt allegedly shares code with pine...
^^
That would be very strange since mutt's author was a part of the elm
* Manoj Srivastava
| How do you suggest I reply to sender if someone scribbles all
| over the reply-to header that the sender has set (in case the from
| header is invalid)?
you use gnus, gnus is able to do this in a sane manner.
from 'info gnus', under Group Parameters
* David Greene
| On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
|
| The problem is L4M3RZ using that broken piece of non-free shit PINE, which
| doesn't appear to respect *any* conventions of netiquette.
|
| Is there a free mailer to replace that broken piece of non-free shit
| PINE that
On 04-Jan-01, 15:24 (CST), John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4 Jan 2001, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
MS He may have, as I do, intend to reply to the list, so everyone
MS can see the conversation. (Quite properly, my MUA ignored the reply
MS to on a list reply; had I cared to respond to
Tollef == Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tollef * Manoj Srivastava
How do you suggest I reply to sender if someone scribbles all
over the reply-to header that the sender has set (in case the from
header is invalid)?
Tollef you use gnus, gnus is able to do this in a sane
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 12:41:24AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
as for including other's in the Mail-Followup-To mutt only does this
if those users had used `lists' instead of `subscribe' indicating they
WANT to be CCed.
There must be a bug in it somewhere, then, because I often see
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
In fact, the only thing the RFC says to do is to honor Reply-To:
headers,
which I might note you didn't include in your message.
Why should I, when it would be no different
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
have been added to Mail-Followup-To by other Mutt users, and I don't use
the
lists command at all.
in that case there would be something funny going on, here is my
theory:
you post to list, you M-F-To: is set to only the
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:40AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
if this is the case the solution is fixing broken mailers, many of
them are Free software so why have patches to support M-F-To not been
made?
I'd like to see someone convince that M-F-To fix Pine. But I doubt you'll
have an
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:23:23PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:40AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
if this is the case the solution is fixing broken mailers, many of
them are Free software so why have patches to support M-F-To not been
made?
I'd like to see
Ethan == Ethan Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ethan pine is a lost cause anyway. i was thinking of GNUs which
Ethan seems to be the other big offender of ignorage of M-F-To.
Ethan (i am not sure if it respects Mail-Copies-To: never i just
Ethan started adding that.)
Gnus
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
in that case there would be something funny going on, here is my
theory:
you post to list, you M-F-To: is set to only the list
someone (Mr-Broken) with broken mailer uses reply-to-all which CCs you
anyway ignoring M-F-To.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:11:50PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
Mail-Followup-To is the correct header to use.
Mail-Followup-To isn't even a registered header! The closest thing to a
registry that RFC822 implies is in the hands of SRI International is
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:15:23PM +0100, Sven Burgener wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:23:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
the new 'testing' distribution (sid) should be even better - nearly
all the benefits of 'unstable' but tested to at least install properly
without error.
Wrong:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:23:23PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
btw is it Mail-Copies-To: never or Mail-Copies-To: nobody ? i have
seen both which is correct? (assuming any MUA actually pays any
attention to this header anyway)
'nobody' is correct.
'never' is deprecated but still observed by
Ethan == Ethan Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ethan pine is a lost cause anyway. i was thinking of GNUs which
Ethan seems to be the other big offender of ignorage of M-F-To. (i
Ethan am not sure if it respects Mail-Copies-To: never i just
Ethan started adding that.)
That just
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:11:50PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
Mail-Followup-To is the correct header to use.
Mail-Followup-To isn't even a registered header! The closest thing to a
registry that RFC822
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:48:46AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
That just demonstrates you have no idea what you are talking about.
oh please. someone already pointed out to me that older versions of
Gnus ignored M-F-To but the current one does not.
go fuck off.
--
Ethan Benson
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PLEASE DON'T CC ME. I'M ON THE LIST
FYI 28 (aka RFC 1855) is the standard.
Strictly speaking it's is only a standard if it is on the Standard
Track and RFC1855 isn't. It is only an informational RFC.
PLEASE DON'T CC ME. I'M ON THE LIST
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 11:06:18PM -0800, Erik Hollensbe wrote:
apt-get and it's kin need more simple getopt-style flags that allow
overriding of certain things, mainly conflicts. Also, an option to
actually view what's being upgraded before you download 250 packages that
are only going to
Ethan == Ethan Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ethan On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:48:46AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
That just demonstrates you have no idea what you are talking about.
Ethan oh please. someone already pointed out to me that older
Ethan versions of Gnus ignored M-F-To
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:34:26AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You prove my point. Resorting to invective is the last refuge
of the incompetent. This is your second demonstration of incompetence
in a public forum in 24 hours; and I suspect your drop in the
estimation of the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 08:44:49PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 08:41:06PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
If I'm already replying to a list, I'm not going to waste bandwidth by
mailing you personally as well.
So what you're saying is that you're purposely ignoring
THANK YOU. Finally, an answer that I can use.
I will look into contributing towards this package.
--
Erik Hollensbe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Programmer, Powells Internet Division
I respect a man who lets me know where he stands, even if he is wrong.
- Malcolm X
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Matt Zimmerman
Date:Thu, 04 Jan 2001 11:06:43 +1100
To: Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: Erik Hollensbe [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
On Wed, Jan
A hobby server? OK; sorry: I saw server and read that as important
server.
But in truth, you should be -filing- bugs against things you find
wrong, for the following reason: not all developers read debian-devel,
so your concerns, as important as they may be, may or may not reach
the responsible
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 07:27:57AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
But in truth, you should be -filing- bugs against things you find
wrong, for the following reason: not all developers read debian-devel,
so your concerns, as important as they may be, may or may not reach
the responsible parties, and
On 03-Jan-01, 22:53 (CST), John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
I didn't say there was. Does Mail-Copies-To: begin with an X?
RFC 822 this time:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html
and Mail-Copies-To: fails to rear it's ugly head, so
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
The problem is L4M3RZ using that broken piece of non-free shit PINE, which
doesn't appear to respect *any* conventions of netiquette.
Is there a free mailer to replace that broken piece of non-free shit
PINE that supports IMAP?
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:59:47 -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Please bear in mind that many of us have been running unstable since
before Debian was released (at all), and fondly remember many fun little
incidents like ld.so completly breaking. Tends to put minor breakage in
perspective.
On 20010104T100704-0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 03-Jan-01, 22:53 (CST), John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The difference between pine and mutt is that you KNOW the overflows in
pinemutt allegedly shares code with pine...
Extremely unlikely, as it originated from elm.
Pine also
Previously Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
Pine also originated from elm, so theoretically it's possible (although
I think both are complete rewrites).
mutt is a complete rewrite and shouldn't share core with elm.
Wichert.
--
On 20010103T212649-0600, Adam Heath wrote:
Perl is a required package, there is no need to list the dependency.
That it is required is not relevant. That it is a virtual essential
package is.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:45:50AM -0500, David Greene wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
The problem is L4M3RZ using that broken piece of non-free shit PINE, which
doesn't appear to respect *any* conventions of netiquette.
Is there a free mailer to replace that broken
(Not Cced :) )
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:15:42PM -0500, D-Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard
to say:
What if I set my Reply-To header to be the address I was sending To?
How would you reply to me? ;-)
To make a totally pointless observation: mutt lets you override Reply-To
when you use the
[ Craig Sanders writes ]
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:26:25AM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
And in the case of the debian mailing lists, you should reply to the
list.
bullshit.
some replies should go to the list, and some replies should be private.
it's up to the person writing the reply to
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Steve Greenland wrote:
SGOn 03-Jan-01, 22:53 (CST), John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SG On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
SG
SG I didn't say there was. Does Mail-Copies-To: begin with an X?
SG
SG RFC 822 this time:
SG
SG http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:43:05 -0800,
Philip Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
But the primary point of a mailing list is for discussion ON THE LIST.
Do you want to disagree with that?
partially. there are enough announce-only and moderated MLs.
So headers should be optimized for group
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:49:45 -0700,
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Let's see: Pine Is Nearly (no-longer lately...) Elm, you say that mutt
actually derives from elm, yet they don't share code. Um, yeah, sure,
whatever. BTW from the LG article about mutt...
AFAICT mutt does not
[ Thomas 'Mike' Michlmayr writes ]
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:43:05 -0800,
Philip Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So headers should be optimized for group discussion.
Replying to individuals is a secondary function.
not at all. replying to individuals is an essentail function that is no
John == John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SG Wrong. This would break my MUA so that reply no longer sends mail back
SG to the originator, as it is supposed to do.
John Well, you replied to the list alone despite my reply-to, so I guess your
John actions don't match your words...
:
,
| X-From-Line: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 4 01:58:07 2001
| Date: Wed Jan 3 23:24:16 2001 +0100
| From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
| Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
| Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Content-Type: multipart
On 4 Jan 2001, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
MSJohn == John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MS
MS SG Wrong. This would break my MUA so that reply no longer sends mail back
MS SG to the originator, as it is supposed to do.
MS
MS John Well, you replied to the list alone despite my reply-to, so I guess
Ethan == Ethan Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ethan On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:34:26AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You prove my point. Resorting to invective is the last refuge
of the incompetent. This is your second demonstration of incompetence
in a public forum in 24 hours; and I
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
mutt allegedly shares code with pine...
That would be very strange since mutt's author was a part of the elm
group. Wouldn't mutt then have started with the elm code base? (or
at least part of it)
--
Pardon me, but you have
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, D-Man wrote:
DOn Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
D mutt allegedly shares code with pine...
^^
D
D
DThat would be very strange since mutt's author was a part of the elm
Dgroup. Wouldn't mutt then have started with the elm code
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:43:05AM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
[ Craig Sanders writes ]
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:26:25AM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
And in the case of the debian mailing lists, you should reply to the
list.
some replies should go to the list, and some replies should be
Philip Brown wrote:
The primary purpose of mailing lists like debian-devel, is for discussion
ON THE LIST.
The purpose of this mailing list is to facilitate communication between
developers working on Debian.
As such, most of this thread is offtopic. Please take it elsewhere.
--
see shy jo
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 04:22:17PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
The purpose of this mailing list is to facilitate communication between
developers working on Debian.
As such, most of this thread is offtopic. Please take it elsewhere.
Agreed. I've been waiting for someone to say this.
- Tal
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 07:45:53PM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
But... if you are using woody for -production-, I'm sorry again, but
that's an idiot move... and you know that if you have spent -any- time
at all on OPN, much less enough to get familiar enough to help others
on channel.
And if
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:16:22AM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
You know, kinda like the way I went nuclear on Wichert when he broke
vim.
You use vi? Emacs rules.
CAN'T YOU READ THE HEADERS OF MY MAILS, YOU SLOPE-HEADED TWIT
I SUBSCRIBE TO THIS
At 10:27 PM 1/2/2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:16:22AM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
You know, kinda like the way I went nuclear on Wichert when he
broke vim.
You use vi? Emacs rules.
CAN'T YOU READ THE HEADERS OF MY MAILS, YOU
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 08:53:23AM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 11:06:18PM -0800, Erik Hollensbe wrote:
And why are packages being REMOVED (lib-pg-perl for example) when I dist
upgrade?
Because thats what dist- stands for. If you dont want to remove conflicting
or
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:57:35PM -0800, Chris Lawrence wrote:
I suspect most people's MUA's don't display non-standard headers by default
But there is also this, which *is* standard[1], and which I also have:
Mail-Copies-To: never
So not only are people stupid, but their MUA's are as well.
Hi Branden!
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:57:35PM -0800, Chris Lawrence wrote:
I suspect most people's MUA's don't display non-standard headers by default
But there is also this, which *is* standard[1], and which I also have:
Mail-Copies-To:
]
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lars Wirzenius said:
There isn't even any need to put anything in the headers. From
Debian Developer's Reference, section 4.1 Mailing lists:
When replying to messages on the mailing list, please do not send
a carbon copy (CC) to the original poster unless they explicitly
request
Hi!
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
ARGL, /me should really get glasses or whatever.
Any reason you ignored my MailFup2 header?
yours,
Hi.
If you want to advocate the use of unstable software, please be my guest...
but not on #debian. it changes daily, and can potentially break every
day, potentially disasterously. So -no-. It's NOT appropriate to tell
people to run servers on unstable software.
On the other hand... if you want
Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you want to advocate the use of unstable software, please be my guest...
but not on #debian. it changes daily, and can potentially break every
Again, what is you right too say so other than it is you oppinion?
Peter Palfrader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
ARGL, /me should really get glasses or whatever.
Any reason you ignored my MailFup2 header?
D'oh. All things
Date:03 Jan 2001 15:23:09 +0100
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
From:Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you want to advocate the use of unstable software, please be my guest
Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you please read the Developers Reference section 4.1 second
paragraph.
When machines break for whatever reason, sometimes people come to
#debian for help. It's unhelpful to encourage people to break their
mission-critical servers... If Eric wants to
Hi...
Date:03 Jan 2001 17:16:44 +0100
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
From:Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-Date: Wed Jan 3 08:17:24 2001
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:54:27AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Chris Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suspect most people's MUA's don't display non-standard headers by default
(I'm pretty sure mutt, pine, evolution, and elm as configured by default
don't... and the lame copy of Eudora I'm
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Please read ``Reply-To'' Munging Considered Harmful URL:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
It should say it all.
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Because it's completely wrong.
Doing so takes the choice of who to reply to (the sender or the list)
out of the hands of the reader [at least without annoying manual
On 3.I.2001 at 19:31 Peter Makholm wrote:
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
One and the same mail can be sent to more than one mailinglists, but the
replyes usualy should go to only one of
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:08:25PM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
Reply-To munging does not benefit the user with a reasonable mailer.
People want to munge Reply-To headers to make ``reply back to the
list'' easy. But it already is easy. Reasonable mail programs have two
separate ``reply''
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:08:25PM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
On 3.I.2001 at 19:31 Peter Makholm wrote:
With one exception:
Reply-To munging does not benefit the user with a reasonable mailer.
People want to munge Reply-To headers to make ``reply back to the
list'' easy. But it
[ D-Man writes ]
...
Try mutt and its L command. The L command means list-reply, aka
only send a message to the list, not to all recepients. It also sets
a header flag so that other well-behaved MUA's don't send you an extra
copy of their replies since you will get it on the list anyway.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:15:42PM -0500, D-Man wrote:
Try mutt and its L command. The L command means list-reply, aka
only send a message to the list, not to all recepients. It also sets
a header flag so that other well-behaved MUA's don't send you an extra
copy of their replies since you
[ Miles Bader writes ]
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Because it's completely wrong.
Doing so takes the choice of who to reply to (the sender or the list)
out of the hands of the reader
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown) writes:
As opposed to the current scheme, which also requires annoying manual
editing of addresses to reply to the list, if your mailreader does the
reasonable thing and assumes you want to reply to the original sender of
the message, in liu of a reply-to
[ Miles Bader writes ]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown) writes:
As opposed to the current scheme, which also requires annoying manual
editing of addresses to reply to the list, if your mailreader does the
reasonable thing and assumes you want to reply to the original sender of
the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
[ Miles Bader writes ]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown) writes:
As opposed to the current scheme, which also requires annoying manual
editing of addresses to reply to the list, if your mailreader does the
reasonable thing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown) writes:
I guess YOUR mailreader is too old or disfunctional to be worth
discussing
I did not request you to Cc me.
But you replied to the list AND me.
Because that is the most useful action for mail followups in the absence
of other information. If you (or
[ Nathan E Norman writes ]
...
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
I guess YOUR mailreader is too old or disfunctional to be worth
discussing
I did not request you to Cc me.
But you replied to the list AND me.
...
Since you've set the Reply-To: header,
[ Miles Bader writes ]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown) writes:
I guess YOUR mailreader is too old or disfunctional to be worth
discussing
I did not request you to Cc me.
But you replied to the list AND me.
Because that is the most useful action for mail followups in the absence
of
On 03-Jan-01, 13:26 (CST), Philip Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
reply-to is meant to direct where you should send replies to.
And in the case of the debian mailing lists, you should reply to the
list.
No, you shouldn't.
(And there lies the crux of the issue. One side things a little
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:57:56PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
For instance, if I followup to any of Branden Robinson's posts, they go
to the list only.
that is because both you and he are using special software.
Let's find out. Miles, Branden, what MUA's do you use?
I happen to use mutt
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:23:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
the new 'testing' distribution (sid) should be even better - nearly
all the benefits of 'unstable' but tested to at least install properly
without error.
Wrong: unstable-sid; testing-woody.
sid/unstable will never become
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
By making Reply-To: point to the list, you make these two different
commands do the same thing, thus depriving the user of the choice.
There is NO depriving of choice.
If the recipient user wants to send to the original sender,
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:35:26PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
ARGL, /me should really get glasses or whatever.
Any reason you ignored my MailFup2
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:04:07PM -0500, D-Man wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:57:56PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
For instance, if I followup to any of Branden Robinson's posts, they go
to the list only.
that is because both you and he are using special software.
Let's find out.
[ D-Man writes ]
A different list that I am on does the Reply-To munging. This means
that if I hit group-reply (when I use an MUA that doesn't understand
lists) the list will get 2 copies : 1 in the To and 1 in the CC field.
Is this really what you want? Getting double mail on the list?
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:24:16PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:04:07PM -0500, D-Man wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:57:56PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
For instance, if I followup to any of Branden Robinson's posts, they go
to the list only.
that is
Hi Branden!
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:35:26PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jan 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
ARGL, /me should really
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Which most MUA's respect. Even this mail was one y
from going only to liw :)
Because fiddling with the reply-to is a horrible horrible thing
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:30:39PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
[ D-Man writes ]
snip
You are free to use whatever MUA you want, but don't complain to the
rest of us if it is broken.
Funny, you just did exactly that. If your mailreader was better, you would
have a better functioning
Branden Robinson wrote:
How about reading my headers, which is all I asked for in the first place?
exmh, at least, does not show Branden's X-no-cc: header; you have to scroll
up to see it. With 400+ messages per day, I'm not likely to scrutinise
headers closely. Furthermore, I make a
Philip == Philip Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Philip As opposed to the current scheme, which also requires
Philip annoying manual editing of addresses to reply to the list,
Why would you need to do that? Doesn't your MUA have a wide
reply setting?
Philip if your mailreader does
Philip == Philip Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Philip guess what?
Philip not everyone uses mutt.
Philip not everyone should.
Yes. Everyone knows that Gnus is the one true mail user agent.
Reply-to is meant to send a message back to the person who wrote the
first one, not to
FYI 28 (aka RFC 1855) is the standard.
There is nothing about honoring X headers at all. In fact, the only thing
the RFC says to do is to honor Reply-To: headers, which I might note you
didn't include in your message. Basically, you're on the wrong side of
RFC 1855 on this issue and all the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 06:16:17AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
If you want to advocate the use of unstable software, please be my
guest... but not on #debian. it changes daily, and can potentially
break every day, potentially disasterously. So -no-. It's NOT
appropriate to tell people to run
:
Date:03 Jan 2001 15:23:09 +0100
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
From:Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you want to advocate the use of unstable software, please be my
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
