* Michael Welsh Duggan <m...@md5i.com> [2010-08-30 18:04]:
Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> writes:
Is there a reason that the reply-to header is not set for the mailing
list? This is the only mailing list I have ever participated in
which does not have this header set and it results in replies being
sent to individuals instead of the list quite regularly. In a list
like this where is explicitly asked that discussions take place in
the list and not back-channel, it seems like it would make sense to
have the header set so that replies are sent to the list by default.
Yes, there is a reason.
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.txt
The logic at those links is impeccable but irrelevant. The "harm" in
"reply-to considered harmful" affects only the elegance of the config
files of a few of the l33t. The harm in multiple misdirected replies is
greater, and a reply not to the list is by definition misdirected. I
know that changing the reply header is not the way mail was supposed to
work, but it simply doesn't matter anymore (assuming it ever did).
--
David
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
