On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
If this is chosen as the preferred path, we could get the list bot to
add "Reply-To: pghackers" in pgsql-patches postings to help push
discussions there. I'd vote for doing the same in pgsql-committers,
which also gets its share of non-null discussion content.
that is a very easy and quick change ... but wasn't doing that brought
up before and alot of ppl were against that?
If nobody objects within, say, the next 24 hours ... ? I'll enabled
that one both ...
Don't be surprised if there are objections - this is one of those things
like emacs vs vi that stirs up religious debate.
If we change Reply-To:, does it prevent replies to the original author?
If so, that seems like a problem, particularly if they are not
subscribed to the patches list.
The Reply-To: header is added to other heads ... in Pine, at least, I have
the option to honor, or disregard, the Reply-To ... I generally honor it,
but there is nothing stop'ng someone from disregarding it, and sending to
the original poster ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
