Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 10:03 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 14:22 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: But again, it's common sense on most lists It's not common sense, in any way. Someone who's never used mailing lists before will not just inherently understand this without needing instruction. Rather, it's a learned behavior that is obtained by interacting with the community and learning what the community standards and practices are. The common sense is to follow the standard of the community and indeed different lists are different communities. that means allowing posts from non-subscribers and replying to all, not just to the mailing list, to ensure non-subscribers are not dropped. Anyway, that's the way I run my mailing lists and the way I'll continue to interact with other, similarly-targeted lists, by default. Thank you that you didn't Cc'ed me ;). ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 19:26 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: Thank you all, for the fire-hose of information concerning mailing-list netiquettes and good practice methods. I, being a *newbie* to mailing-lists, not *nix in general, now have full understanding to the pros and cons in regard to different style message replies. From what I can conclude, there is no absolute right way to reply. Therefor, every message I post, will need to factor in a Human logic decision process based on the context, addressee, purpose and public benefit factor as to which method should best be utilized. Again thank you for the education, plus an enjoyment factor more entertaining than watching 12 Angry Man. Glad you enjoyed it. The takeaway is that each list has its own culture and it's best to align yourself with that if you want to get the most out of it. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 09:48 +, Pete Biggs wrote: snip That's why I dislike being directly sent replies to mailing list posts. It breaks things for me; it makes things difficult for me. And I can explicitly say I don't want it to happen until I'm blue in the face, but it won't make any difference to anything, people will still keep doing what they think is the only way it should be done - or more likely what is most convenient for them. It's Monday morning and I'm grumpy ... P. I agree with you on this issue. . . . Hope that makes your Monday a little better. Bart ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 09:48 +, Pete Biggs wrote: (If that seems odd, remember that the person who replies cannot know if you're subscribed to the list or not, so it's horribly rude of them to *drop* you from the direct recipients and potentially cut you out of the conversation. See http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html ) Hmm, *I* think it's horribly rude to ask a question on a mailing list to which you aren't subscribed. It's not just about asking questions. Someone might have been added to Cc because they can *answer* a question. Like Claire, in the examples discussed at the above URL. Or sometimes a message is quite reasonably cross-posted to more than one list, and it's inappropriate to fork the discussion by continuing it only on *one* of the relevant lists. I can explicitly say I don't want it to happen until I'm blue in the face, but it won't make any difference to anything, people will still keep doing what they think is the only way it should be done - or more likely what is most convenient for them. It's not so much about most convenient for them, but more about what's most convenient, or at least least inconvenient for more people. If you get a message in your inbox instead of the mailing list folder, I do appreciate that it annoys you, but at least you *have* the message. We're comparing with a situation where other people are just cut out of the decision *entirely*, which is far worse for them than the mild annoyance you experienced. Obviously, if you *know* someone's preferences and happen to remember them at the moment you reply, you can adhere to them (as I have done in this case, although you didn't do me the same courtesy). But the *default* behaviour needs to be the one with least inconvenience for most people, surely? -- dwmw2 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 00:48 +, David Woodhouse wrote: Btw, when replying to a message in Evolution try selecting just the part of the email you want to reply to, then hit reply while it's selected. I think that should override the normal reply behaviour, shouldn't it? That's a nice feature, selecting only those parts to respond to. Unfortunately, the global respond method is adhered to every time. -JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 14:22 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: But again, it's common sense on most lists It's not common sense, in any way. Someone who's never used mailing lists before will not just inherently understand this without needing instruction. Rather, it's a learned behavior that is obtained by interacting with the community and learning what the community standards and practices are. And of course those can change for different communities. The problem is that the people who most need the help are often new users who don't have any understanding of these standards yet. Different types of lists may make different decisions, but user help lists should be as inclusive as possible, and that means allowing posts from non-subscribers and replying to all, not just to the mailing list, to ensure non-subscribers are not dropped. Anyway, that's the way I run my mailing lists and the way I'll continue to interact with other, similarly-targeted lists, by default. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:07:52 +, David Woodhouse wrote: On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 13:07 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: However, IMO it's important to find the least common denominator that works for most MUAs. For mailing lists the rule is, that most of the times a reply should be send to the mailing list only. [citation needed] I could quote a lot of mailing list rules, since *buntu users often are Linux newbies I have a signature for *buntu lists: [snip] Write your email underneath the email which you are replying to [snip] remove any unnecessary text [snip] Avoid sending emails in HTML format [snip] When replying to messages, use [snip] Reply To List function [snip] When starting a new subject, do not reply to a previous email [snip] Replying to digest emails breaks the threading [1] [snip] - http://community.ubuntu.com/contribute/support/mailinglists/ [1] Solvable by using MIME Digest http://www.list.org/mailman-member/node28.html; There are just a few exceptions when it makes sense to Cc Did you read the various use cases described at No, I didn't, but I'm aware about exceptions. But again, it's common sense on most lists and that's the reason why MUAs such as Evolution, Claws and tons of others are able to invoke mailing list replies by simply using the Reply or Group Reply option. Btw. I didn't receive two messages from you, since I set up my Evolution mailing list account to avoid duplicated messages, the drawback of this is, that the mail I received doesn't contain the mailing list headers. You are breaking the way most of us want it. Mails that are send to a mailing list, but don't contain mailing list headers, as yours, get a coloured label here and you mail is the only mail in the last hours that got that label. Consider to reply to the list only, unless there should be a very good reason to Cc. I guess there isn't a good reason for you to do it at the moment. ;) ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
It depends on the mailing list settings. There is a per user setting on many mailing lists of Avoid duplicate messages. With that you don't receive the list copy if you are listed in the To: or Cc: headers. Which is good, because you don't get two copies; but it's bad because the *only* copy you receive doesn't have the list headers on it, which breaks filtering and Reply to list. And if the list is moderated for non-subscribers (or whatever), then you receive, and possibly reply to, a message before the rest of the list sees it. That's why I dislike being directly sent replies to mailing list posts. It breaks things for me; it makes things difficult for me. And I can explicitly say I don't want it to happen until I'm blue in the face, but it won't make any difference to anything, people will still keep doing what they think is the only way it should be done - or more likely what is most convenient for them. FWIW I've added you as another use case in http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html Thank you for helping me to refine it. In summary, then: If you reply-to-all, then some people will get a second copy of the list message, which might annoy them a tiny bit. But if it does, it's usually trivial for them to tell the list software not to send them a copy when they're already in the To: or Cc: headers. If they do *that* then they might receive some list traffic in their INBOX instead of the list folder. Which they can also trivially fix by changing their filters to match any messages which are To: or Cc: the list even when they didn't actually come via the list (which is traditionally considered a false positive but in this case is exactly what they want). Not that it particularly matters, my server-side filters already filter the Evolution list on To: and Cc: headers because I couldn't rely on the list headers. I have a choice you see - either I get things in my Inbox, which is full enough as it is, or I get non-list originated mail in my Evolution folder. Neither of which are ideal. But the primary downside, which you have omitted, is that the received message does not have any of the list headers, because it didn't go via the list. So you can't Reply To List at all and you break everything to do with list handling. And no, Pete is most definitely not happy in the scenario you have added. I think you should correct it to Pete is grumpy because someone sent him the email directly, but he manages to cope with it because he knows there's nothing he can do about it. On the other hand, if you *don't* reply-to-all, and restrict your reply to only the one list that you happened to receive the mail from, then you may cut all kind of other people out of the discussion entirely. And there's nothing at all they can do about that. My experience of the mailing lists I use is that cross-list posting is vanishingly small as is CC'ing external experts. YMMV but that argument cuts very little ice with me. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 09:48 +, Pete Biggs wrote: It depends on the mailing list settings. There is a per user setting on many mailing lists of Avoid duplicate messages. With that you don't receive the list copy if you are listed in the To: or Cc: headers. Which is good, because you don't get two copies; but it's bad because the *only* copy you receive doesn't have the list headers on it, which breaks filtering and Reply to list. And if the list is moderated for non-subscribers (or whatever), then you receive, and possibly reply to, a message before the rest of the list sees it. That's why I dislike being directly sent replies to mailing list posts. It breaks things for me; it makes things difficult for me. And I can explicitly say I don't want it to happen until I'm blue in the face, but it won't make any difference to anything, people will still keep doing what they think is the only way it should be done - or more likely what is most convenient for them. FWIW I've added you as another use case in http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html Thank you for helping me to refine it. In summary, then: If you reply-to-all, then some people will get a second copy of the list message, which might annoy them a tiny bit. But if it does, it's usually trivial for them to tell the list software not to send them a copy when they're already in the To: or Cc: headers. If they do *that* then they might receive some list traffic in their INBOX instead of the list folder. Which they can also trivially fix by changing their filters to match any messages which are To: or Cc: the list even when they didn't actually come via the list (which is traditionally considered a false positive but in this case is exactly what they want). On the other hand, if you *don't* reply-to-all, and restrict your reply to only the one list that you happened to receive the mail from, then you may cut all kind of other people out of the discussion entirely. And there's nothing at all they can do about that. There, is that a reasonable summary? -- dwmw2 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
Will the mailman ignore/bitbucket those messages that the source address is not subscribed? I believe they are held for moderation. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:49:48 +, Pete Biggs wrote: Will the mailman ignore/bitbucket those messages that the source address is not subscribed? I believe they are held for moderation. For some mailman lists they are held for moderation, for other lists they are rejected [3]. Some lists send a mail [1] with a link for confirmation [2], if a mail is held for moderation. This link enables to chose. The OP then could decide to cancel the mail or to await moderation. This Evolution list held those mails for moderation, but doesn't send a mail with a confirmation link. If we randomly sent using a wrong account and then resend the mail using the correct account, we unintended sent a duplicated mail. I wasn't aware of this issue, until a moderator blamed me for sending a duplicated mail. [1] Your mail to 'ubuntu-studio-users' with the subject test Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. The reason it is being held: Post by non-member to a members-only list Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel this posting, please visit the following URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/confirm/ubuntu-studio-users/...; [2] Cancel held message posting Your confirmation is required in order to cancel the posting of your message to the mailing list ubuntu-studio-users: Sender: ralf.mardorf@... Subject: test Reason: Post by non-member to a members-only list Hit the Cancel posting button to discard the posting. Or hit the Continue awaiting approval button to continue to allow the list moderator to approve or reject the message. [3] From: mailer-dae...@yahoo.com To: ralf.mard...@rocketmail.com Subject: Failure Notice Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:05:28 - Sorry, we were unable to deliver your message to the following address. linux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org: Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 linux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org: Recipient address rejected:... Or they send a mail from the list, that you aren't allowed to post to the list. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
Hi, there's a big problem with the way a mailing list handles mails and the way different MUAs handle mailing list mails. The least common denominator is that we should only reply to the mailing list and not to anybody else, we also shouldn't post to more than one list by one email. Let me explain my point of view. Some mailing lists are open mailing lists, but most mailing lists require subscription. However, not all mailing lists are based on mailman, but most are. For mailman mailing lists it's possible to prevent sending duplicated messages. The drawback then is, that we will receive the mail that was sent to us directly only, IOW this mail doesn't contain mailing list headers. Not all MUAs behave in the same manner. There are different ways to handle filters and even to invoke a mailing list reply. I for example use Claws and Evolution. Claws invokes mailing list replies by the Reply option, while Evolution does it using the Group Reply option. Regarding the way a mailing list reply is invoked, Evolution most of the times handles it better than Claws does, if we don't receive duplicated messages. OTOH Claws handles some other issues better than Evolution does and even this issue comes with variations. However, IMO it's important to find the least common denominator that works for most MUAs. For mailing lists the rule is, that most of the times a reply should be send to the mailing list only. There are just a few exceptions when it makes sense to Cc and those exceptional cases could be handled automatically, if the mailing list doesn't overwrites the Reply-To header. In such a case Claws does behave better than Evolution. It's possible to always send a mail to the list and not send a copy, if a sender didn't use a Reply-To header, but if a Reply-To header is used, the reply will be send to the list and to the Reply-To address, assumed the mailing list doesn't overwrite the Reply-To header. So, the major issue is, that different MUAs behave different and that even mailing lists using mailman, could have different settings, even settings a user can't set up by the account settings, such as e.g. how the list handles the Reply-To header. The approach my needs are the most important needs and my MUA does it the one and only right way is ignorant. Communities should care about things in common. It's common sense to send a mail to just one mailing list and to send a reply to the mailing list only. There are exceptions, but those are very seldom for user lists, so they are unimportant for the common sense and as pointed out, it's possible to handle the Cc'ing smarter, when using Regards, Ralf ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 13:07 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Hi, there's a big problem with the way a mailing list handles mails and the way different MUAs handle mailing list mails. The least common denominator is that we should only reply to the mailing list and not to anybody else, we also shouldn't post to more than one list by one email. Let me explain my point of view. Some mailing lists are open mailing lists, but most mailing lists require subscription. However, not all mailing lists are based on mailman, but most are. For mailman mailing lists it's possible to prevent sending duplicated messages. The drawback then is, that we will receive the mail that was sent to us directly only, IOW this mail doesn't contain mailing list headers. Not all MUAs behave in the same manner. There are different ways to handle filters and even to invoke a mailing list reply. I for example use Claws and Evolution. Claws invokes mailing list replies by the Reply option, while Evolution does it using the Group Reply option. Regarding the way a mailing list reply is invoked, Evolution most of the times handles it better than Claws does, if we don't receive duplicated messages. OTOH Claws handles some other issues better than Evolution does and even this issue comes with variations. However, IMO it's important to find the least common denominator that works for most MUAs. For mailing lists the rule is, that most of the times a reply should be send to the mailing list only. There are just a few exceptions when it makes sense to Cc and those exceptional cases could be handled automatically, if the mailing list doesn't overwrites the Reply-To header. In such a case Claws does behave better than Evolution. It's possible to always send a mail to the list and not send a copy, if a sender didn't use a Reply-To header, but if a Reply-To header is used, the reply will be send to the list and to the Reply-To address, assumed the mailing list doesn't overwrite the Reply-To header. So, the major issue is, that different MUAs behave different and that even mailing lists using mailman, could have different settings, even settings a user can't set up by the account settings, such as e.g. how the list handles the Reply-To header. The approach my needs are the most important needs and my MUA does it the one and only right way is ignorant. Communities should care about things in common. It's common sense to send a mail to just one mailing list and to send a reply to the mailing list only. There are exceptions, but those are very seldom for user lists, so they are unimportant for the common sense and as pointed out, it's possible to handle the Cc'ing smarter, when using Regards, Ralf Since this mailing list requires a subscription, I will address my responses to the mailing list, so that everybody benefits from the answers. Will the mailman ignore/bitbucket those messages that the source address is not subscribed? -JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 13:07 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: However, IMO it's important to find the least common denominator that works for most MUAs. For mailing lists the rule is, that most of the times a reply should be send to the mailing list only. [citation needed] There are just a few exceptions when it makes sense to Cc Did you read the various use cases described at http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html? Did I miss some? The approach my needs are the most important needs and my MUA does it the one and only right way is ignorant. Yes. Yes, it is. Now, please read the various examples given in the above URL, understand why doing things one way causes a *minor* annoyance for you (and John and Mary in the examples given there) but doing it the other way causes other people (Claire, Karl, Fred, etc.) to be completely cut out of the conversation — and think about which choice is behaving in the fashion you describe above as 'ignorant', and which is trying to cause the least amount of inconvenience to *everyone*. -- dwmw2 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 12:44 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 00:48 +, David Woodhouse wrote: Btw, when replying to a message in Evolution try selecting just the part of the email you want to reply to, then hit reply while it's selected. I think that should override the normal reply behaviour, shouldn't it? That's a nice feature, selecting only those parts to respond to. Unfortunately, the global respond method is adhered to every time. Selecting part of the message to quote has nothing whatever to do with how the reply is directed. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 15:47 +, David Woodhouse wrote: On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 14:07 +, Pete Biggs wrote: Not that it particularly matters, my server-side filters already filter the Evolution list on To: and Cc: headers because I couldn't rely on the list headers. I have a choice you see - either I get things in my Inbox, which is full enough as it is, or I get non-list originated mail in my Evolution folder. Neither of which are ideal. Well, if your preference is to only receive *one* copy (which I accept is a valid choice even if it's not *my* choice), then surely you have to choose one or the other? Sure, *I* agree that neither is ideal, but isn't that what you *wanted*? No, not at all. What I *WANT* is to only receive mailing list message from the mailing list. But that's not going to happen because people will always do Reply to All for whatever reason and there's no way that I can select to stop non-list replies [1]. So I have to go for non-ideal compromises because of the actions of other people. Right, this is totally of topic for this list. I am not going to participate any further in this discussion. P. [1] actually, perhaps I should put in an MTA rule that rejects mail containing evolution-list in the headers, but doesn't contain the list headers... ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 14:07 +, Pete Biggs wrote: Not that it particularly matters, my server-side filters already filter the Evolution list on To: and Cc: headers because I couldn't rely on the list headers. I have a choice you see - either I get things in my Inbox, which is full enough as it is, or I get non-list originated mail in my Evolution folder. Neither of which are ideal. Well, if your preference is to only receive *one* copy (which I accept is a valid choice even if it's not *my* choice), then surely you have to choose one or the other? Sure, *I* agree that neither is ideal, but isn't that what you *wanted*? Ok, we discuss the primary downside of the missing RFC2639/RFC2919 List-* headers below, but other than that, what's the problem with directly-received list messages getting put into the list folder? Is it that you're concerned about the case where someone deliberately adds you to Cc as well as sending to the list... as distinct somehow from someone replying to you *and* the list, which you already said you want to land in the list folder only? But the primary downside, which you have omitted, is that the received message does not have any of the list headers, because it didn't go via the list. So you can't Reply To List at all OK, so you need a few extra keystrokes if you want to ignore my heartfelt pleas and still continue to deliberately cut people out of the discussion. I do concede I had omitted describing that as a 'downside'. :) Of course, you could add the headers yourself in your filter if you *really* wanted to, couldn't you? More sensibly perhaps, we already have per-folder options for replies. We have the 'Send Account Override' which controls which identity to use for replies within a specific folder. It shouldn't be that hard to add a *destination* override for the 'Group Reply' action in each folder too. and you break everything to do with list handling. You mean the 'Message' - 'Mailing List' - 'Unsubscribe' and similar options? Do you actually *use* those very often? They're cute, but they don't seem to be *common* actions. And again, if you *really* wanted to you could probably add the relevant headers at your own end. But still, the overall picture hasn't changed much. When making the choice of how to reply, we are comparing the fact that some people might be entirely cut out of the discussion if we reply-to-list, with what is still a fairly minor inconvenience for you if we reply-to-all. My experience of the mailing lists I use is that cross-list posting is vanishingly small as is CC'ing external experts. YMMV but that argument cuts very little ice with me. My mileage definitely does vary. I find myself added to Cc on quite a lot of different discussions, on mailing lists I'm either not subscribed to, or which I *am* subscribed to but almost never look at their folders. On those lists which I rarely check, it happens quite often that when I *do* look into them, someone has *replied* to one of my messages and was asking for help, but didn't get it because they didn't actually send their message to *me*. Sometimes I take pity on them and follow up. Other times I just leave their message unanswered. As for list cross-posting, I took a look at a Linux kernel related mailing list which I run. Of the 2662 messages in there since I last archived my own mail store, 1633 were also copied to a list @vger.kernel.org. That's more than half. And many of the lists I'm on have a lot of cross-posting. It does also happen on *this* list, although obviously less than 50% of the time. Sometimes between this list and the evolution-hackers list, and other times between other GNOME lists. For example, https://wiki.gnome.org/MaintainersCorner says that release-team, gnome-doc-list *and* gnome-i18n must be be notified of new stable branches, and those messages are usually cross-posted. Likewise, string breaks in a stable release also IIRC require a message being sent to multiple lists. It *isn't* as uncommon as you make out, *even* here. It's kind of pointless to argue about the relatively frequencies of the different types of users, and the prevalence of cross-posting and adding people to Cc. Each person will have different experiences. All we can agree on is that they *do* all exist, and it *does* all happen. And even if it's considered rare, it's often the case that when people or other lists are added to Cc, that's done because they are the *most* useful people, and most likely to be able to solve the problem. They were added for a *reason*. We have to compare the down-side of cutting those people out of the discussion, with the down-side of a trivially minor annoyance to some other people. Even if there are *significantly* more people in the latter category, it still doesn't necessarily change the outcome. -- dwmw2 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:32:23 +, David Woodhouse wrote: There, is that a reasonable summary? No, because there are no clear rules and several solutions to handle things, but without rules different MUAs, different mailing list settings and different workflows from users, it's a mess. It's impossible to write a reasonable summary. However, cross-posting is impossible to handle, that's why it's frowned upon. Cc'ing on open mailing lists and developer's lists sometimes makes sense. 1. Only Cc to those who needs to be Cc'ed, they likely have filter settings to handle this. 2. Don't Cc to anybody else. Just because Evolution doesn't invoke mailing list replies by Reply, so that a smart automatically handling using the Reply-To header can't be used to distinguish those who want to be Cc'ed, from those who don't want it, doesn't mean that it can't be done better. Don't get me wrong, I prefer Evolutions style to invoke mailing list replies by Group Reply over Claws style, but de facto the way Claws does it could be an advantage. It's too funny that some open mailing lists overwrite the Reply-To header, so that it isn't useful anymore for that purpose. On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:47:50 +, David Woodhouse wrote: Would you mind letting me know why you do it that way, rather than just putting them in the list folder where you so vehemently say you want them to be? I would like to accurately weigh up and represent the pros and cons for all kinds of recipients in my examples. I'm still fairly sure which side the balance will come down on, of course, but it's good to be accurate. Yes, for most mailing lists I've got separated folders, but not for all lists. I wasn't precise. All mails without mailing list headers get a label, so I can distinguish off-list replies and private mails easily, what ever filtering I use. You also should consider that not everybody does use Evolution. Evolution does invoke a mailing list reply by the Group Reply. Claws does invoke it by Reply, so at least for Claws I also need the label to notice that I have to push Group Reply (All) instead of invoking a mailing list reply. As long as there are no clear rules for mailing lists, we need to find the least common denominator. Even on most open mailing lists the policy is to reply to the list only. A user is free to request to be Cc'ed, but the others are free to ignore this wish, since there are still the open list's archives. There's no need to be subscribed and to receive mails by being Cc'ed. You should join a non-technical mailing list for e.g. a political party, were many people are subscribed who don't have a clue about emails, then you'll become aware why the least common denominator on mailing lists is important. Those people break with all common sense regarding everything that is useful for mailing lists, so correspondences become completely unreadable. 2 Cents ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
David Woodhouse, don't mix up kernel development mailing lists with averaged user and averaged developer mailing lists. Mailing lists are mainly for subscribers. Interested people usually subscribe and people who aren't subscribed usually don't want to receive mails related to a list they don't join. Open mailing lists allow people to ask a single question or to provide help one or two times, without the need to subscribe. People who want to be included in ongoing discussions have got to subscribe. Every mailing list provides the option to subscribe to the list! So it's common sense, there are no ifs, no buts, subscribe to a list and reply to this list only! Exceptions, are exceptions, are exceptions! David, by your point of view, with quasi everybody add to the Cc header, why do we have mailing lists at all? ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
Thank you all, for the fire-hose of information concerning mailing-list netiquettes and good practice methods. I, being a *newbie* to mailing-lists, not *nix in general, now have full understanding to the pros and cons in regard to different style message replies. From what I can conclude, there is no absolute right way to reply. Therefor, every message I post, will need to factor in a Human logic decision process based on the context, addressee, purpose and public benefit factor as to which method should best be utilized. Again thank you for the education, plus an enjoyment factor more entertaining than watching 12 Angry Man. -JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
(If that seems odd, remember that the person who replies cannot know if you're subscribed to the list or not, so it's horribly rude of them to *drop* you from the direct recipients and potentially cut you out of the conversation. See http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html ) Hmm, *I* think it's horribly rude to ask a question on a mailing list to which you aren't subscribed. I *hate* it when people CC me on mailing list replies - use Reply to list and not Reply All, that's what it's there for. But this is not a prompt for a long debate - it's nothing anyone can do anything about because you can't impose your preferences on how someone else behaves. If you filter as described above, *both* copies of the reply will get filtered into the folder, rather than only the one which actually arrived via the list. It depends on the mailing list settings. There is a per user setting on many mailing lists of Avoid duplicate messages. With that you don't receive the list copy if you are listed in the To: or Cc: headers. Which is good, because you don't get two copies; but it's bad because the *only* copy you receive doesn't have the list headers on it, which breaks filtering and Reply to list. And if the list is moderated for non-subscribers (or whatever), then you receive, and possibly reply to, a message before the rest of the list sees it. That's why I dislike being directly sent replies to mailing list posts. It breaks things for me; it makes things difficult for me. And I can explicitly say I don't want it to happen until I'm blue in the face, but it won't make any difference to anything, people will still keep doing what they think is the only way it should be done - or more likely what is most convenient for them. It's Monday morning and I'm grumpy ... P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 08:39 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: Hi, you mentioned in another email in this thread that you use evolution-ews. That reminded me of: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=671893 which your version contains, but also of: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=719376 which your version doesn't contain. Once you have the version with the later fix you'll have the filter on the List-ID (which is the message- list filter using internally) working for your EWS account. Bye, Milan Thanks Milan! Yep, I bet that is it. I've built some filters that will hopefully process the messages as a work around. I will have to wait for an update through my distro until then. -JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:01 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: For now, I added another condition Recipients, contains, evolution-list@gnome.org You're liable to get false positives with that one. When someone replies to a thread you're actively participating in, you should normally get a message directly in your inbox, as well as the one to the mailing list. (If that seems odd, remember that the person who replies cannot know if you're subscribed to the list or not, so it's horribly rude of them to *drop* you from the direct recipients and potentially cut you out of the conversation. See http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html ) If you filter as described above, *both* copies of the reply will get filtered into the folder, rather than only the one which actually arrived via the list. The best thing to filter on is the Return-Path, which for this list would be evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org. However, you said you're using EWS and I don't think Exchange actually creates a Returh-Path header for incoming mail. The next best thing would be the List-Id header. That does still have false positives — if someone *knows* you're no longer subscribed to the list (but your filters might still be in place because who ever cleans up their filters?), or they know you are subscribed but never look in that folder, they might redirect a list mail to you personally. And then your filter would have a false positive. You may not care about that possibility, in which case filtering on List-Id should be fine for you. Personally, that situation *does* happen to me and I want my filters to be correct :) Btw, when replying to a message in Evolution try selecting just the part of the email you want to reply to, then hit reply while it's selected. I think that should override the normal reply behaviour, shouldn't it? -- dwmw2 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 17:46 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: My apologizes for my ignorance with using an incorrect method. Is there a method in evolution to prompt a different reply methods in lieu of the global option? The default settings for replying and forwarding can be changed under Edit ▸ Preferences ▸ Composer Preferences ▸ General ▸ Replies and Forwards ▸ Reply style. (from https://help.gnome.org/users/evolution/stable/mail-composer-reply.html ) I think the OP may have been asking if there is a way to do this differently according to the kind of message. That could be a useful option, e.g. when replying to a list versus a non-list message. Given that HTML seems the prevalent form these days, in part being the default for most if not all webmail accounts and perhaps others, I would second Patrick's suggestion. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
I think the OP may have been asking if there is a way to do this differently according to the kind of message. That could be a useful option, e.g. when replying to a list versus a non-list message. Given that HTML seems the prevalent form these days, in part being the default for most if not all webmail accounts and perhaps others, I would second Patrick's suggestion. It's nothing to do with HTML, it's to do with how people deal with the email they are replying to. The reply style is independent of the format of email you are replying to. And I would STRONGLY refute your assertion that HTML is prevalent these days - less than about 5% of the emails I receive (that aren't spam) are HTML. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Sat, 2015-03-14 at 09:49 +, Pete Biggs wrote: I think the OP may have been asking if there is a way to do this differently according to the kind of message. That could be a useful option, e.g. when replying to a list versus a non-list message. Given that HTML seems the prevalent form these days, in part being the default for most if not all webmail accounts and perhaps others, I would second Patrick's suggestion. It's nothing to do with HTML, it's to do with how people deal with the email they are replying to. The reply style is independent of the format of email you are replying to. Exactly. Also, this isn't really my suggestion as I don't care about it. I was merely interpreting what I thought the original request was. Anyone interested should file an RFE on Bugzilla. And I would STRONGLY refute your assertion that HTML is prevalent these days - less than about 5% of the emails I receive (that aren't spam) are HTML. Same here, but I don't know if anyone really knows. Most of my mail in terms of numbers of messages comes through lists such as this one, in which HTML is strongly discouraged. Most of the rest is from people using some kind of webmail, or an app on their phone, and that tends to be in the form of rich text. Not much is HTML aside from marketing. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
Hi, On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 17:46 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: My apologizes for my ignorance with using an incorrect method. Is there a method in evolution to prompt a different reply methods in lieu of the global option? The default settings for replying and forwarding can be changed under Edit ▸ Preferences ▸ Composer Preferences ▸ General ▸ Replies and Forwards ▸ Reply style. (from https://help.gnome.org/users/evolution/stable/mail-composer-reply.html ) Cheers, andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:25 +, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:01 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: That sounds like an excellent idea. I will start doing the same. For now, I added another condition Recipients, contains, evolution-list@gnome.org Please note that when replying on mailing lists such as this one, the usual practice is to quote those parts of the original message you wish to comment on, and add your remarks below them (see the present message for an example). Using the Attachment option for replies is not suitable in this context. poc My apologizes for my ignorance with using an incorrect method. Is there a method in evolution to prompt a different reply methods in lieu of the global option? JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 19:56 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote: Hi, On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 17:46 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: My apologizes for my ignorance with using an incorrect method. Is there a method in evolution to prompt a different reply methods in lieu of the global option? The default settings for replying and forwarding can be changed under Edit ▸ Preferences ▸ Composer Preferences ▸ General ▸ Replies and Forwards ▸ Reply style. (from https://help.gnome.org/users/evolution/stable/mail-composer-reply.html ) I think the OP may have been asking if there is a way to do this differently according to the kind of message. That could be a useful option, e.g. when replying to a list versus a non-list message. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
Am Freitag, den 13.03.2015, 13:43 + schrieb Justin Musgrove: First off, I am new to the Mailing Lists, so the issue that I am having is probably related more to user error. Using Evolution 3.8.5 on CentOS 7. My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. Have you checked in the filters (main Menu - Edit - Filters) that the new filter rule is there and triggers on incoming mails? Maybe it has gotten into outgoing mails. -- thomas ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. You don't say what sort of account it is (imap, pop, ews, ...) but if the message is being filtered correctly with Ctrl-Y then the filter itself is working. The issue is usually to do with what is a New message. If you have another client looking at the same mail, then the mail will not be considered New if that client sees it first - note that Unread is not the same as New. If the mail isn't New, then the filters won't be applied. There are some hints on sorting out filter issues in the Evolution help: Help - Contents - Common Mail Questions - Mail filters are not working. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
The account is using the EWS protocol. I have ensured that evolution is the only client accessing the mail server. The mailing list messages are coming in with the New status. I have verified that filter is under the Incoming tab under filters. I double checked that there are not any active filter rules on the server. I'm sure I am just over looking something. -JM ---BeginMessage--- My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. You don't say what sort of account it is (imap, pop, ews, ...) but if the message is being filtered correctly with Ctrl-Y then the filter itself is working. The issue is usually to do with what is a New message. If you have another client looking at the same mail, then the mail will not be considered New if that client sees it first - note that Unread is not the same as New. If the mail isn't New, then the filters won't be applied. There are some hints on sorting out filter issues in the Evolution help: Help - Contents - Common Mail Questions - Mail filters are not working. P. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list ---End Message--- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
[Evolution] Mailing list filters
First off, I am new to the Mailing Lists, so the issue that I am having is probably related more to user error. Using Evolution 3.8.5 on CentOS 7. My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. Below is an excerpt from the message source that I believe the filter rule should be acting on. I am just over looking something here? Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion and user queries of Evolution evolution-list.gnome.org List-Unsubscribe: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/options/evolution-list, mailto:evolution-list-requ...@gnome.org?subject=unsubscribe List-Archive: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/ List-Post: mailto:evolution-list@gnome.org List-Help: mailto:evolution-list-requ...@gnome.org?subject=help List-Subscribe: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list, mailto:evolution-list-requ...@gnome.org?subject=subscribe -JM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 15:36 +0100, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote: Am Freitag, den 13.03.2015, 13:43 + schrieb Justin Musgrove: First off, I am new to the Mailing Lists, so the issue that I am having is probably related more to user error. Using Evolution 3.8.5 on CentOS 7. My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. Have you checked in the filters (main Menu - Edit - Filters) that the new filter rule is there and triggers on incoming mails? Maybe it has gotten into outgoing mails. I have found several times, I created a filter and had it not work although it would work if specifically ran on the folder. I was able to get it to work by adding an action at the bottom of the list of actions, stating to Stop Processing. Can't figure why, but it does work. My policy is to add a Stop Processing action at the bottom of every filter Just Because. I think there was a thread about just this, some time ago. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:01 +, Justin Musgrove wrote: That sounds like an excellent idea. I will start doing the same. For now, I added another condition Recipients, contains, evolution-list@gnome.org Please note that when replying on mailing lists such as this one, the usual practice is to quote those parts of the original message you wish to comment on, and add your remarks below them (see the present message for an example). Using the Attachment option for replies is not suitable in this context. poc ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Mailing list filters
That sounds like an excellent idea. I will start doing the same. For now, I added another condition Recipients, contains, evolution-list@gnome.org -JM ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 15:36 +0100, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote: Am Freitag, den 13.03.2015, 13:43 + schrieb Justin Musgrove: First off, I am new to the Mailing Lists, so the issue that I am having is probably related more to user error. Using Evolution 3.8.5 on CentOS 7. My issue is that I setup a Mailing List Filter for this Evolution mailing list, but the filter isn't working automatically. If I press ctrl-y then the message is processed properly. Filter should move the incoming emails to a folder. I used the context menu (CreateCreate a Filter Rule for Mailing List...) off one of the mailing-list emails. I ensured the Apply filters to new messages in Inbox on this server is ticked. Still the message are not properly being filtered. This seems like a simple task, yet I am unable to figure it out. Have you checked in the filters (main Menu - Edit - Filters) that the new filter rule is there and triggers on incoming mails? Maybe it has gotten into outgoing mails. I have found several times, I created a filter and had it not work although it would work if specifically ran on the folder. I was able to get it to work by adding an action at the bottom of the list of actions, stating to Stop Processing. Can't figure why, but it does work. My policy is to add a Stop Processing action at the bottom of every filter Just Because. I think there was a thread about just this, some time ago. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list ---End Message--- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
