Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 17:56, Chris Noon wrote: > > o A stronger community results when individuals respond to > > individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the list... > > > > I don't doubt that you are right about that, but I do read threads that have > nothing to do with me. And I have gained quite a bit of personal knowledge > by doing so. So when I have a problem and ask the list for help, I like to > think that by replying to the list I help to further other's knowledge as > well... but maybe thats just me ;) No, it's not just you. Further, the answers get into the archives, which means if I run into a similar problem I'll find my answer there rather than having to post a question that's already been answered. Regards, Caity Caitlyn Martin Senior Systems Administrator RateIntegration, Inc.
Re: reply-to in mailing list (and bringing it home)
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 12:20:53PM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote: > > How often does amanda upgrade in ways that break your existing config? > (Never, to my knowledge.) Just an FYI, If I recall correctly in 2.3 -> 2.4 transition broke things. Or was it 2.2 to 2.3? Anyway, it was done only with much discussion among the then very active amanda-hackers. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 17:56, Chris Noon wrote: >> o A stronger community results when individuals respond to >> individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the >> list... > >I don't doubt that you are right about that, but I do read threads > that have nothing to do with me. And I have gained quite a bit > of personal knowledge by doing so. So when I have a problem and > ask the list for help, I like to think that by replying to the > list I help to further other's knowledge as well... but maybe > thats just me ;) You are not alone. IMO thats what these lists are all about, being friendly neighbors you wave at as they pass by. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: reply-to in mailing list
--On Thursday, October 10, 2002 17:56:14 -0400 Chris Noon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> o A stronger community results when individuals respond to >> individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the list... >> > > I don't doubt that you are right about that, but I do read threads that have > nothing to do with me. And I have gained quite a bit of personal knowledge > by doing so. So when I have a problem and ask the list for help, I like to > think that by replying to the list I help to further other's knowledge as > well... but maybe thats just me ;) There are several good reasons why all relevant Q&A should stay on list: Everyone has a chance to learn from the collective wisdom of the group. Like Chris, I have learned a lot from reading the list about topics I never posted a question about. There is a chance to get corrected or clarified answers, since different people notice different facets of the posted problems and proposed solutions, and on rare occasions may give out incorrect or incomplete answers which need to be corrected, so as not to confuse people later in the archives. The archives - no words of wisdom in private replies make it into the archives, so the same question will have to be asked (and answered) again later on the list. Total resolution time can be shorter, since everyone has different times they are available to read and answer email. If I reply to a question on Friday night and you reply back only to me, I may not see it until Saturday or maybe Sunday, and could possibly be gone on vacation for a week. If the followup goes to the group, someone else may see and respond to it sooner. Most people are more familiar with the parts of Amanda they use, so the person that knew all about how to configure your changer may not be as confident on answering a followup question on multiple configs or firewall settings. Frank -- Frank Smith[EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673 Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501
Re: reply-to in mailing list
> > o A stronger community results when individuals respond to >> individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the list... >> > >I don't doubt that you are right about that, but I do read threads that have >nothing to do with me. And I have gained quite a bit of personal knowledge >by doing so. So when I have a problem and ask the list for help, I like to >think that by replying to the list I help to further other's knowledge as >well... but maybe thats just me ;) Yes.. that is the ideal :) ... but take a look at what happens to a list when reply-to is set to the list and the people do not exercise *a lot* of self-discipline... I just recently un-subscribed to just such a list because the traffic and noise just became intolerable... And I was REALLY interested in the subject matter too! So it was not as easy decision... at first. The list was an otherwise useful list except that personal attacks and me too's, and jsut and overall chattiness prevailed... It was all posted to the list... I finally through in the towel. In contrast, I cannot (do not want to) afford to leave the AMANDA list any time soon. Plus, there are some *way* smart people here (with more experience in their little finger than...). The community risks losing these people if their busy lives (or personalities) cannot tolerate excessive list traffic. In my opinion, the daily traffic is high enough as configured... :)
Re: reply-to in mailing list
> o A stronger community results when individuals respond to > individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the list... > I don't doubt that you are right about that, but I do read threads that have nothing to do with me. And I have gained quite a bit of personal knowledge by doing so. So when I have a problem and ask the list for help, I like to think that by replying to the list I help to further other's knowledge as well... but maybe thats just me ;)
Re: reply-to in mailing list
how about parsing for anything in the Sender header "Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and be done with it... ### And regarding the reply-to to the list... I think (hope) not. :) I think posting to the list should be a little extra effort as this is not a small community. o Traffic would increase with no significant increase in content. o If a response needs to go to the list because the information needs to be documented, then it will probably be evident by the nature of the specific thread. and last but not least: o A stronger community results when individuals respond to individuals as opposed to responding to all members of the the list...
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 13:24, Dave Sherohman wrote: >On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 12:58:09PM -0400, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 12:19pm, Gene Heskett wrote >> >> > On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: >> > >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see >> > >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier >> > >to sort mailing lists. >> > >> > And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are >> > subscribed, and its not, then something is seriously mucking >> > with the headers of your incoming mail. >> >> Err, it doesn't come in that way here... > >Nor here. Given that I set up this mail server and didn't tell it > to do any header munging, I suspect that Gene has something > adding the list name to his subject lines. A procmail recipe, > maybe? No, see my previous couple of posts re this Dave. I was confusing the Subject: line with the To: line. I use kmail, and a reply all button includes the To: lines contents in the outgoing address line when used instead of a plain reply, which would go only to you. Can I plead oldtimers or something? Blame it on excessive birthdays? OTOH, you won't find too many on a list such as this who were born on or before 10/04/34. Now that I'm somewhat retired this past July, I can spend a bit more time trying to help newbies which I was once one of. I am at times, truely one who has been there, and done that. I seem to have had an uncanny ability to be at the right time and the right place for unusual things all thru my over 50 years of chasing electrons for a living. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 12:58, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: >On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 12:19pm, Gene Heskett wrote > >> On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: >> >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see >> >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier >> >to sort mailing lists. >> >> And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are >> subscribed, and its not, then something is seriously mucking >> with the headers of your incoming mail. > >Err, it doesn't come in that way here... My mistake Joshua, I was confusing Subject: with To:, and my agent has a reply all button so you will get 2 copies of this, one as mail and one as a list subscriber. Here, the incoming To: line is always set to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: reply-to in mailing list
[ On Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 07:58:03 (-0700), Jerry wrote: ] > Subject: Re: reply-to in mailing list > > Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see > [amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier > to sort mailing lists. That dead horse had damn well better stay dead. Get a real mail client that can filter on the many already available bits of information in the headers -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098;<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 12:35, Anthony Hardy wrote: >No . . i don't think anything is mucking with his email headers . > . . .the reply-to: just isn't included in the headers at all . > .so most email programs use the from: as a reply address. . . > which belongs to the individual that sent the email. > >Anthony Thats fine I'd say, IF your email agent also has a "reply all" option, which is what I use in KMail to reply to any message I reply to on a mailing list. The reply all button sends my reply back out, both as private email to you, and to the list itself by including the contents of the To: line in the outgoing address string, comma delimited. Hence you, and you only, will get 2 copies of this message, one as private email, and one from the list. If your agent doesn't have a "reply all" button or function, maybe its time to see what else is available. [...] >> >> And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are >> subscribed, and its not, then something is seriously mucking >> with the headers of your incoming mail. I was confusing the Subject: line with the To: line as displayed here, so the above statement is a ways off base. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 12:19, Gene Heskett wrote: >On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: >>Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see >>[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier >>to sort mailing lists. > >And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are > subscribed, and its not, then something is seriously mucking with > the headers of your incoming mail. And now I see the erronious data I was using to make the above statement. The phrase "amanda-users" is not in the subject line, its in the To: line as I see it here, and yes I sort it to its own directory by that. KMail has rather extensive sorting and treatment abilities, even in the older version 1.42 as KDE-3.0.2 installs To me at least, wasting space on the subject line to include some indicator thats its amanda related is just 100% wasted space, what we have now is adequate. My apologies for my confusion :-( -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: reply-to in mailing list
Galen Johnson wrote: > Hey Gang, > > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it > up so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to > all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt > out rather than in). > > I'm pretty sure majordomo should be able to handle this but my > experience lies with mailman so I can't speak from experience. > > =G= > Whoa...didn't realize I was opening such a can of worms. I say (and I can since I began this thread) just ignore this post and go on with your day...I'll cope. ANd just for the record, I, too, get tired of the gui world since most of the machines I support are just headless *n*x boxen and really have no need for a monitor since even when I'm interfacing to them I tend to console in. It's just anooying to have to export the display (not to mention slower) when I have to want to do something the *requires* a gui interface (Oracle install comes to mind and a couple of veritas apps (which has a command line but doesn't allow you to do some things w/o the gui)). That being said...and as I mentioned previously, I was just being lazy. =G=
Re: reply-to in mailing list (and bringing it home)
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 10:46:05AM -0500, Larry Dunham wrote: > I don't know what lists you belong to (I belong to 10 or 12), but this is > the only list I've ever heard of where the default reply goes to the person > who posted the question rather than back to the list. "Reply All" is a > bandwidth waster, Then, like I said before, get a mail client with a 'list reply' feature or tell your current MUA's vendor to add it. > To swing things back on topic, I think some of the frustration felt by > newer users of AMANDA is that there's nothing intuitive about it. How true. Looking at the posts I've seen in my time on the list (including one currently-running thread), there seem to be a lot of people who want to tell their backup system exactly what to do. amanda's 'just tell me what to do and I'll figure out how to do it for you' design seems to be too simple for them. But I suspect that's not what you meant... > AMANDA, like the whole Unix/Linux world, may have a lot of geek appeal, but > frankly, I have an IT department to run; I'm not interested in geek > appeal--I need applications I can set up and run without having to spend all > day searching for arcane answers to basic operational questions. So do I. That's why I run most of my servers with an OS that delivers meaningful (if sometimes a little cryptic) error messages instead of stripping all meaning from them in an attempt to be "friendly". It's also why I run apps (like, for instance, amanda) which I can set up once and then forget about. > Command line business apps went away 10 years ago > because the graphical environment had a learning curve for new employees > that was much shorter, cutting the cost of ownership. ...which is a flaw in the business world, not in *nix. These days, businesses tend to focus very heavily on the short term, often to the detriment of the long term. Is it better to choose software which is quick to learn and lets a new employee accomplish more in his first month at the company or something which takes a little longer to learn, but allows him to do more over the year and a half (average IT turnover time, last I heard) that he's working there? You're also ignoring version drift. How long has it been since Windows last made a significant change in its user interface? How long has it been since amanda or bash/tcsh/your-shell-here did so? *nix apps are mostly learn-once. Windows apps seem much more likely to "update" their look in incompatible ways on a regular basis, requiring frequent retraining. Beyond that, this is just as much an effect of market penetration as it is of GUI's supposed superiority. Windows apps are quick to pick up because 99% of the population is already familiar with Windows. If 99% used *nix, then you could get them going on *nix just as quickly. Funny how you can get someone doing something they already know faster than you can teach them something new, isn't it? > Where is the > advantage to using AMANDA? It's "free" but if you spend hundreds of dollars > in lost productivity getting it up and running, what is gained? How often does amanda upgrade in ways that break your existing config? (Never, to my knowledge.) How often does do so? How much ongoing support does amanda require? (None, aside from updating disklist when machines are added to or removed from the backup schedule.) How much does require? Even if amanda requires more time to set up initially (which, IMO, is only likely if you want to make it do something it's not designed to), it may well require much less ongoing maintenance, thus recovering the "lost productivity getting it up and running" and then some. > Most businesses aren't interested in using *n*x as a political statement > simply to raise a nemesis for MS. It has to work and work efficiently. Yep. That's why my employer switched over 85%+ of their computers from Windows to Linux before I got here and we're constantly on the lookout for opportunities to change over the few remaining Windows machines. I'm told that they got fed up with Windows crashing (yeah, I hear it doesn't do that as much these days) and decided they needed something more stable for some quasi-embedded boxes, then decided they liked it so much they switched over the servers and desktops as well.
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 12:58:09PM -0400, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 12:19pm, Gene Heskett wrote > > On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: > > >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see > > >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier > > >to sort mailing lists. > > > > And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are subscribed, > > and its not, then something is seriously mucking with the headers > > of your incoming mail. > > Err, it doesn't come in that way here... Nor here. Given that I set up this mail server and didn't tell it to do any header munging, I suspect that Gene has something adding the list name to his subject lines. A procmail recipe, maybe?
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 12:19pm, Gene Heskett wrote > On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: > >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see > >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier > >to sort mailing lists. > > And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are subscribed, > and its not, then something is seriously mucking with the headers > of your incoming mail. Err, it doesn't come in that way here... -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
OT: RE: reply-to in mailing list (and bringing it home)
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 10:46am, Larry Dunham wrote > I don't know what lists you belong to (I belong to 10 or 12), but this is > the only list I've ever heard of where the default reply goes to the person > who posted the question rather than back to the list. "Reply All" is a Hmm, let's see -- this one, several local to Duke, XFS, beowulf, nfs, ide-arrays, pvfs-users... Of those, only nfs sets reply-to, and that may well be b/c I'm subscribed in digest mode. > bandwidth waster, since if you click to reply to this message, I'll get a > message from you and the same message from the list...silly huh? My vote is > that all replies by default go back to the list only. And where does that leave those unsubscribed to the list and needing a quick answer -- the very newbies you speak of below? If you want Reply-To, it's trivial to set it yourself for mails to any list (well, depeding on your mail software -- I have no idea (nor desire to know) how to use the virus vector you're using). > To swing things back on topic, I think some of the frustration felt by > newer users of AMANDA is that there's nothing intuitive about it. Our I'm sorry, but I don't consider a rant (such as follows) about a the supposed superiority of GUI tools and supposed lack of amanda docs on topic. > AMANDA, like the whole Unix/Linux world, may have a lot of geek appeal, but > frankly, I have an IT department to run; I'm not interested in geek > appeal--I need applications I can set up and run without having to spend all > day searching for arcane answers to basic operational questions. > > I'm certainly not the world's biggest Bill Gates fan, and no one is happier > than I that *n*x boxes are giving us an alternative to padding Bill's > wallet, but the OS has a long way to go to become a serious MS competitor in > the business world. Command line business apps went away 10 years ago > because the graphical environment had a learning curve for new employees > that was much shorter, cutting the cost of ownership. Where is the > advantage to using AMANDA? It's "free" but if you spend hundreds of dollars > in lost productivity getting it up and running, what is gained? > > Most businesses aren't interested in using *n*x as a political statement > simply to raise a nemesis for MS. It has to work and work efficiently. > Documentation for AMANDA sucks, and for a complex command-line application, > supposedly coming of age for business applications, that just doesn't cut > it. I'm only replying to this b/c you've really pushed some of my buttons. I am sick and tired of people claiming that any tool without a GUI is automatically inferior to those with one. I literally see no place for a GUI with amanda. *Maybe* for amrecover, but for setup and day to day operations, a GUI would simply introduce an unnecessary layer of complexity. Most GUI apps I've seen slow me down relative to the command line (e.g. Windows' "Search for Files and Folders" vs. locate/find). The most basic rule of computing (as with most things) is to use what works best for you. If you think (as you seem to) that amanda is too hard to understand, then maybe it isn't the best tool for you. Personally, a couple of days spent with docs/INSTALL, the "chapter" at backupcentral, and the list archvies and I had a test setup up and running. Admittedly, it takes a bit of time to wrap one's head around amanda's backup philosophy, but that's only b/c it's very different (and, IMO, better) than the standard "incrementals on weekdays, full on Saturday" strategy. But even this is explained in the docs. Between the docs directory, the man pages, FAQ-O-Matic, the chapter, and the mailing list archives, I really am at a loss to see how anyone can claim that amanda is poorly documented. If you'd like to debate this anymore, let's take if off-list, as it really is OT. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
Re: reply-to in mailing list
No . . i don't think anything is mucking with his email headers . . . .the reply-to: just isn't included in the headers at all . .so most email programs use the from: as a reply address. . . which belongs to the individual that sent the email. Anthony - Original Message - From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jerry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 11:19 AM Subject: Re: reply-to in mailing list > On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: > >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see > >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier > >to sort mailing lists. > > And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are subscribed, > and its not, then something is seriously mucking with the headers > of your incoming mail. > > >--- Dave Sherohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 08:41:18AM -0400, Galen > >> > >> Johnson wrote: > >> > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be > >> > >> possible to set it up > >> > >> > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > >> > >> > header. This would make it so the default reply > >> > >> (rather than reply to > >> > >> > all) goes to the list. This would also make the > >> > >> archives a bit more > >> > >> > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply > >> > >> to all" would start > >> > >> > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda > >> > >> like having to opt out > >> > >> > rather than in). > >> > >> For a summary of the major arguments on each side of > >> this holy war, > >> ask google about "Reply-To Considered Harmful" and > >> its rebuttal, > >> "Reply-To Considered Useful". > >> > >> My vote, FWIW, is to leave things as they are. I > >> use a mail client (mutt) > >> which is smart enough to have a 'reply to list' > >> function in addition to > >> the ubiquitous 'reply to sender' and 'reply to all'. > >> If your client > >> doesn't support 'reply to list', file a feature > >> request or switch to > >> one that does. Don't ask the rest of the world to > >> compensate for your > >> software's limitations. > > > >__ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More > >http://faith.yahoo.com > > -- > Cheers, Gene > AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M > Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M > 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly >
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thursday 10 October 2002 10:58, Jerry wrote: >Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see >[amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier >to sort mailing lists. And it doesn't come in that way at your site? If you are subscribed, and its not, then something is seriously mucking with the headers of your incoming mail. >--- Dave Sherohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 08:41:18AM -0400, Galen >> >> Johnson wrote: >> > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be >> >> possible to set it up >> >> > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]' >> >> > header. This would make it so the default reply >> >> (rather than reply to >> >> > all) goes to the list. This would also make the >> >> archives a bit more >> >> > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply >> >> to all" would start >> >> > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda >> >> like having to opt out >> >> > rather than in). >> >> For a summary of the major arguments on each side of >> this holy war, >> ask google about "Reply-To Considered Harmful" and >> its rebuttal, >> "Reply-To Considered Useful". >> >> My vote, FWIW, is to leave things as they are. I >> use a mail client (mutt) >> which is smart enough to have a 'reply to list' >> function in addition to >> the ubiquitous 'reply to sender' and 'reply to all'. >> If your client >> doesn't support 'reply to list', file a feature >> request or switch to >> one that does. Don't ask the rest of the world to >> compensate for your >> software's limitations. > >__ >Do you Yahoo!? >Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More >http://faith.yahoo.com -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.17% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
RE: reply-to in mailing list (and bringing it home)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joshua Baker-LePain Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:29 AM To: Galen Johnson Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: reply-to in mailing list Seriously, this is a much debated topic in the world of mailing lists, with no clear best practice. Rather than start another lengthy OT discussion, I vote we just leave it as is (which, btw, is the same setting as the majority of mailing lists out there). My $.02. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University --- Larry Replies: I don't know what lists you belong to (I belong to 10 or 12), but this is the only list I've ever heard of where the default reply goes to the person who posted the question rather than back to the list. "Reply All" is a bandwidth waster, since if you click to reply to this message, I'll get a message from you and the same message from the list...silly huh? My vote is that all replies by default go back to the list only. To swing things back on topic, I think some of the frustration felt by newer users of AMANDA is that there's nothing intuitive about it. Our organization uses Backup Exec on our NT/2K boxes and I walked in, never having used it before, and I have never had to ask anyone a question about configuration or how to setup a backup or change tapes. AMANDA, like the whole Unix/Linux world, may have a lot of geek appeal, but frankly, I have an IT department to run; I'm not interested in geek appeal--I need applications I can set up and run without having to spend all day searching for arcane answers to basic operational questions. I'm certainly not the world's biggest Bill Gates fan, and no one is happier than I that *n*x boxes are giving us an alternative to padding Bill's wallet, but the OS has a long way to go to become a serious MS competitor in the business world. Command line business apps went away 10 years ago because the graphical environment had a learning curve for new employees that was much shorter, cutting the cost of ownership. Where is the advantage to using AMANDA? It's "free" but if you spend hundreds of dollars in lost productivity getting it up and running, what is gained? Most businesses aren't interested in using *n*x as a political statement simply to raise a nemesis for MS. It has to work and work efficiently. Documentation for AMANDA sucks, and for a complex command-line application, supposedly coming of age for business applications, that just doesn't cut it. Larry A. Dunham Systems Support Specialist FirsTech, Inc. Voice (217) 421-7143 Fax (217) 421-7148
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 07:58:03AM -0700, Jerry wrote: > Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see > [amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier > to sort mailing lists. Mus' be Dead Horse Week. How about [AU] or something else shorter than [amanda-users], for those of use who don't run our email client full-screen? [ ... ] -- - Dan Wilder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Technical Manager SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549 Phone: 206-782-8808 Seattle, WA 98155-0549URL http://www.linuxjournal.com/ -
ALTERED Re: reply-to in mailing list
haha . got caught in the reply-to myself just now and didn't send it to the list. I would like to see a subject tag. Perhaps [AMANDA] or something shorter:). When browsing email, it allows for sorting by subject for those of us who don't want to sort by To: (which can be misleading, as one CAN carbon copy the list, or even bcc the list). Anthony - Original Message - From: "Joshua Baker-LePain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Galen Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:29 AM Subject: Re: reply-to in mailing list > On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 8:41am, Galen Johnson wrote > > > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it up > > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to > > all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more > > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start > > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt out > > rather than in). > > > > I'm pretty sure majordomo should be able to handle this but my > > experience lies with mailman so I can't speak from experience. > > What is it recently with so much religion being discussed on this list? > Tar/dump, hard/soft compression, spam, reply-to? Furrfu. :) > > Seriously, this is a much debated topic in the world of mailing lists, > with no clear best practice. Rather than start another lengthy OT > discussion, I vote we just leave it as is (which, btw, is the same setting > as the majority of mailing lists out there). > > My $.02. > > -- > Joshua Baker-LePain > Department of Biomedical Engineering > Duke University >
Re: reply-to in mailing list
Not to beat a dead horse, but it would be nice to see [amanda-users] in the subject line to make it easier to sort mailing lists. --- Dave Sherohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 08:41:18AM -0400, Galen > Johnson wrote: > > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be > possible to set it up > > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > header. This would make it so the default reply > (rather than reply to > > all) goes to the list. This would also make the > archives a bit more > > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply > to all" would start > > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda > like having to opt out > > rather than in). > > For a summary of the major arguments on each side of > this holy war, > ask google about "Reply-To Considered Harmful" and > its rebuttal, > "Reply-To Considered Useful". > > My vote, FWIW, is to leave things as they are. I > use a mail client (mutt) > which is smart enough to have a 'reply to list' > function in addition to > the ubiquitous 'reply to sender' and 'reply to all'. > If your client > doesn't support 'reply to list', file a feature > request or switch to > one that does. Don't ask the rest of the world to > compensate for your > software's limitations. > __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 08:41:18AM -0400, Galen Johnson wrote: > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it up > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to > all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt out > rather than in). For a summary of the major arguments on each side of this holy war, ask google about "Reply-To Considered Harmful" and its rebuttal, "Reply-To Considered Useful". My vote, FWIW, is to leave things as they are. I use a mail client (mutt) which is smart enough to have a 'reply to list' function in addition to the ubiquitous 'reply to sender' and 'reply to all'. If your client doesn't support 'reply to list', file a feature request or switch to one that does. Don't ask the rest of the world to compensate for your software's limitations.
Re: reply-to in mailing list
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 8:41am, Galen Johnson wrote > I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it up > so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to > all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more > complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start > posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt out > rather than in). > > I'm pretty sure majordomo should be able to handle this but my > experience lies with mailman so I can't speak from experience. What is it recently with so much religion being discussed on this list? Tar/dump, hard/soft compression, spam, reply-to? Furrfu. :) Seriously, this is a much debated topic in the world of mailing lists, with no clear best practice. Rather than start another lengthy OT discussion, I vote we just leave it as is (which, btw, is the same setting as the majority of mailing lists out there). My $.02. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
Re: reply-to in mailing list
At 07:41 AM 10/10/2002, Galen Johnson wrote: >Hey Gang, > >I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it up so >the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' >header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to >all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more >complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start >posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt out >rather than in). I for one have no problem with this change. Might be nice when new users post a message to the list, someone responds to the list, but then the new user keeps emailing them directly.. >I'm pretty sure majordomo should be able to handle this but my experience >lies with mailman so I can't speak from experience. There's a config option "reply_to" which can be set to the list or $SENDER, etc. >=G= -- Darin Dugan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reply-to in mailing list
Hey Gang, I've had a thunk regarding the list...would it be possible to set it up so the list actually inserts a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' header. This would make it so the default reply (rather than reply to all) goes to the list. This would also make the archives a bit more complete since us lazy users that forget to "reply to all" would start posting the solutions to the list directly (kinda like having to opt out rather than in). I'm pretty sure majordomo should be able to handle this but my experience lies with mailman so I can't speak from experience. =G=
