Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
At Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:00:40 +0100 Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had > that. Which mail client has that? Emacs/gnus has this f (followup) or F (followup, include original). Both are located just to the right of the third hot water faucet. :-) allan -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: On Thursday 24 February 2005 11:10 am, Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Next you'll be claiming it doesn't matter whether you use vi or emacs ;-) Let's not get into religion on this list. ;) Hehe, I use both... Wonder where that takes me... /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Thursday 24 February 2005 11:10 am, Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Next you'll be claiming it doesn't matter whether you use vi or emacs > ;-) Let's not get into religion on this list. ;) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:23:39 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > My statement does not concern offensive, libellous, or embarrassing > emails at all. :P My statement concerns the fictional "loss of > information" associated with not sending to the list. It is not fictional. if the list has all the questions but only half the answers, the archives are severely reduced in usefulness. This is especially true if someone posts an incorrect answer but the replies correcting him go by private mail. When the purpose of the list dictates that replies should most usefully go straight back to it, adding a suitable reply-to is sensible. > I disagree. It's a very clear issue. Altering an existing Reply-To is > wrong. :P I never mentioned altering an existing reply to. In doing that, the server is removing information from the original mail, which should not happen. There are listservs out there that will add a Reply-To but not replace one. > I'm only half serious here, don't take this as incendiary as it sounds. > :) Next you'll be claiming it doesn't matter whether you use vi or emacs ;-) -- Neil Bothwick I'm Pink, Therefore I'm Spam pgpTwBEEji6IB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Thursday 24 February 2005 10:01 am, Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:08:21 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > No, it's not. You can *always* send a message again if it was > > supposed to go to the list. You *can't* retract a message if it was > > not supposed to go to the list. > > If you are going to send potentially offensive, libellous or > embarrassing emails, you should check carefully where you are sending > them, instead of relying on a setting on a remote server that can be > changed, without notice, at the admin's whim. -1 Offtopic. :) My statement does not concern offensive, libellous, or embarrassing emails at all. :P My statement concerns the fictional "loss of information" associated with not sending to the list. It also concerns to actuall "waste of bandwidth" associated with sending to a list unintentionally. Of course, in this day and age, I don't think the bandwidth is much to be concerned about, unless the mailing list software is "stupid" enough to send out a message consisting of "My ISO I made with Catalyst doesn't work." plus said ISO attached without some sort of administrative approval. > Making the default action to be a reply to the list makes sense for a > list such as this one. For other lists, that may not be the case. This > is not a black and white issue, the best approach depends on the > circumstances. I disagree. It's a very clear issue. Altering an existing Reply-To is wrong. :P I'm only half serious here, don't take this as incendiary as it sounds. :) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:08:21 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > No, it's not. You can *always* send a message again if it was supposed > to go to the list. You *can't* retract a message if it was not supposed > to go to the list. If you are going to send potentially offensive, libellous or embarrassing emails, you should check carefully where you are sending them, instead of relying on a setting on a remote server that can be changed, without notice, at the admin's whim. Making the default action to be a reply to the list makes sense for a list such as this one. For other lists, that may not be the case. This is not a black and white issue, the best approach depends on the circumstances. -- Neil Bothwick Windows Error #05: Nonexisent error. This cannot really be happening pgpfCSm6QlAp9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Thursday 24 February 2005 07:43 am, William Kenworthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wrong, a reply that does not go back to the list is knowledge lost to > the community ... No, it's not. You can *always* send a message again if it was supposed to go to the list. You *can't* retract a message if it was not supposed to go to the list. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Wrong, a reply that does not go back to the list is knowledge lost to the community ... BillK On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 08:28 -0500, Dave Nebinger wrote: > > I know that today I sent two messages back to the people who originally > > posted when I really wanted it to go back to the list. Yes I was not > > thinking and just did a reply (which should have gone to the list). > > That's just it - the thought process should go into which messages go to the > list, not which messages go to the OP. > > Of course the OP should always get the reply, but the list as a whole should > not. > > > > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list > -- William Kenworthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home! -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
> I know that today I sent two messages back to the people who originally > posted when I really wanted it to go back to the list. Yes I was not > thinking and just did a reply (which should have gone to the list). That's just it - the thought process should go into which messages go to the list, not which messages go to the OP. Of course the OP should always get the reply, but the list as a whole should not. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
http://www.acronymfinder.com/ - Has quite a few Dennis Taylor wrote: Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been out of circulation for a few years could find out what things like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me clueless. -Original Message- From: Holly Bostick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken Andrea Barisani wrote: and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time to discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- This site uses frames And yet your browser does not. One of these will change. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 06:17 pm, Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:54:51 -0600 > > Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > No, that's not the best thing. It break emails that use the reply-to > > header for it's original (and standards-compliant) behavior. It may > > be easy, but that doesn't make it right. > > > > Please read, if you haven't already, the document Andrea linked. > > And then read this one and then argue about it forever! > > http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml This document does not refute the "Can't Find My Way Back Home" point in reply-to-considered-harmful. The composer of the email is given "first rights" to the Reply-To header, munging it causes information loss (and it can be important information). I have no problem with list software *adding* the Reply-To header, but overwriting an existing one is a recipe for disaster. Also a quote from http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html : "But the arguments in [reply-to-useful] very easily refutable [http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.txt], as I wrote in the following post when participating to a thread on the mailman lists." -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Oh #$#R*&Y not again, please check the (ancient) archives on why this list was changed from the behaviour that you seem to have initiated without consultation with the list. In short: 1) many replies to the list (and the expertise it represented) were lost as most people never bothered to navigate down the menus to readd the list to the reply - note that this is a user behaviour, not an automatic action and its not in human nature to do extra work unnecessarily. This is THE major reason to retain the old behaviour. 2)the user ends up with two replies because its extra clicks to delete them - why bother? 3) annoying the user base unnecessarily - respect the users because without them gentoo will die 4) most user based email lists work at the old behaviour for the above reasons 5)on past behaviour, be ready for a continuing flame war and questions "why does this list work differently to every other email list I am on ..." that will negate any gains you think you have made 6)this is one of the most annoying problems with gmail - if you get an email direct from a gentoo user and not to the list, it was most likely due to a gmmail account Enough said, change it back, NOW. (yes, this has pissed me off) BillK On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 15:32 +0100, Andrea Barisani wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:41:40PM +0100, Andreas Vinsander wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the > > list... is that an intentional change? > > > > I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. > > > > /Andreas > > -- > > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list > > > > The Reply-To header is useless since all MUA supports the "reply to > list/all/sender" functions and usually reply-to should be set by the > person who's sending the message. > > Take a look at this: > > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > Cheers > -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:54:51 -0600 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > > No, that's not the best thing. It break emails that use the reply-to > header for it's original (and standards-compliant) behavior. It may be > easy, but that doesn't make it right. > > Please read, if you haven't already, the document Andrea linked. > And then read this one and then argue about it forever! http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml My personal view, from a large number of lists I have been on and remain on, is that reply-to munging has more advantages than disdvantages. Thats a personal view and there are arguments both ways. It seems that Andrea has changed back to munging, thanks for that Andrea. Frankly if it changes to no munging I will be disappointed, but my life will not be over. HOWEVER, I would say to you Andrea, or whoever else is in charge, please please tell the list before you make changes, and with a day or so's notice! -- Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Karsten Baumgarten wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Holly Bostick wrote: | Andrea Barisani wrote: | |> and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no |> time to |> discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. |> | | Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page | about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo | (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? | | That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Even though Andrea had (was forced?) to revert the changes for the "reasons" mentioned in this thread, here's the simple solution for Thunderbird users: Instead of using "Reply to sender" or "Reply to all" simply use the "Edit as new" option to compose a message to the mailing list. Regards, Karsten Hey, now, that's a useful idea! Thanks! Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On 19:03 Wed 23 Feb , Holly Bostick wrote: > Andrea Barisani wrote: > > >and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time > >to > >discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. > > > > Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page > about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo > (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? There are already docs for mutt. It's in the gentoo desktop docs. Bill -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
KQEMU was Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 05:04:30PM -0500, Dennis Taylor wrote: > Go ahead, if you like preaching to the choir. :-) In the land > of Perfect, there would be no Windoze, but I don't live in > perfect. > > I said long ago that Norton Anti-virus is not very effective > because it does not detect windows as a virus. :-( > Windows self replicate? Does that mean my QEMU installation will start backing itself up? This could come in handy. =) In any case, has anyone played with QEMU lately? I currently don't have the guts to install an alpha-stage kernel patch, so I haven't yet tested out KQEMU aka the QEMU accelerator. Any comments on that? (and no, please don't refer me to /., the source of myriad mis-information) Also, how does /proc/cpuinfo get its data? I think the Bogomips number is calculated at boot time, no? How about the CPU speed? I am asking because if I tried booting linux in QEMU under my gentoo box, the Emulated OS reports the exact same data in /proc/cpuinfo compared to the host OS, except for a bogomips number that is slightly slower (IIRC something like 70% of the host OS). I know that bogomips are NOT the best way of measuring performance, but consider the following: From the QEMU website http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/ * Without the KQEMU module, the guest OS should run at 10 to 20% of of a native OS on the same computer. * With the module on x86 machines, the guest OS can run at 50% or better. So either bogomips as a way of gauging performance is a lot more broken than I imagined, or Fabrice Bellard significantly underestimated the performance of his own code W -- * Address: 45 Spelman Hall, Princeton University 08544 * * Phone: x68958 AIM: AngularJerk* *E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]From: sep.dynalias.net * The mathematical probability of a common cat doing exactly as it pleases is the one scientific absolute in the world. ~Lynn M. Osband Sortir en Pantoufles: up 13:45 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 23:17:19 +0100, Karsten Baumgarten wrote: > Even though Andrea had (was forced?) to revert the changes for the > "reasons" mentioned in this thread, here's the simple solution for > Thunderbird users: Instead of using "Reply to sender" or "Reply to all" > simply use the "Edit as new" option to compose a message to the mailing > list. Won't that remove the In-Reply-To header and thus break threading? -- Neil Bothwick Windows is a colorful clown suit for DOS. pgpQSgxREUEJO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Holly Bostick wrote: | Andrea Barisani wrote: | |> and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no |> time to |> discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. |> | | Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page | about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo | (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? | | That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Even though Andrea had (was forced?) to revert the changes for the "reasons" mentioned in this thread, here's the simple solution for Thunderbird users: Instead of using "Reply to sender" or "Reply to all" simply use the "Edit as new" option to compose a message to the mailing list. Regards, Karsten -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCHQDvgUNlsZQzobwRAlPDAKCLUiBJvOdMFVJVmqL1qkjwJIriiwCglrr9 4XRNLxvQgdQbkB2MkK0N/fM= =fOd8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Dave Nebinger wrote: This is a perfect example of why the 'reply to' thing was originally broken, recently fixed, and today reset back to the broken state. One person posts an OT message that is quite easily resolved by doing a simple google search. But since the 'reply to' is broken again, we get 7 different replies telling the whole list, rather than the one person, how to find out what the acronym means. Andrea, I'm sorry if you felt flogged by folks wanting the old modus operandi in place; you were right in the first place to have fixed the 'reply to'. From my point of view the list behaviour you're talking about is broken. Why? Because this is a _list_, where people discuss different topics. It's not for private conversation; that would easily be solved by having a webpage with members mail address so that you could email them in private. Yes, the "correct" (acc. to my view) behaviour does mean some redundancy but that is usually for "trivial" questions, like the one above. People use this list for getting answers to their gentoo-related questions. Mailing people in private means that other people on the list with similar problems might miss the solution. Also all mail is archived and before one sends an email about a problem one should check the archives first; if one sends the answer to people in private the solution will not be stored in the archives... Just my x.xx . Best regards Peter K -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Go ahead, if you like preaching to the choir. :-) In the land of Perfect, there would be no Windoze, but I don't live in perfect. I said long ago that Norton Anti-virus is not very effective because it does not detect windows as a virus. :-( -Original Message- From: A. Khattri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 4:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Dennis Taylor wrote: > (whether I like it or not, no MS flames please) Why shouldn't we flame the easiest virii target on the planet? ;-) -- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Dennis Taylor wrote: > (whether I like it or not, no MS flames please) Why shouldn't we flame the easiest virii target on the planet? ;-) -- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Dennis Taylor wrote: > Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been > out of circulation for a few years could find out what things > like MUA mean? GOGLE. -- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Not a direct response to Chris's post, but... If you really dislike getting duplicates AND believe that all mail should be directed and the list rather than to you personally, there is NOTHING to stop you from adding the Reply-To header yourself. =) I have a hook in mutt that does just that for some of the mailing lists I am on. Best, W On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 03:20:39PM -0500, Christopher Fisk wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Holly Bostick wrote: > > >Don't forget also changing CC: for the list to To: and the fact that > >anyone who doesn't feel like removing those additional entries will double > >my incoming mail for any thread I have responded to (because I'm in the CC > >so I get it personally, and I get it from the list). > > I agree, in fact, I will probably end up replying to the wrong person on > some threads, which can become annoying. But that said, if you have > access to procmail you can use the following recipe to keep from getting > duplicate messages: > -- * Address: 45 Spelman Hall, Princeton University 08544 * * Phone: x68958 AIM: AngularJerk* *E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]From: sep.dynalias.net * W: use VIM... no Emacs. S: Vim? Sortir en Pantoufles: up 12:47 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Christopher Fisk wrote: I agree, in fact, I will probably end up replying to the wrong person on some threads, which can become annoying. But that said, if you have access to procmail you can use the following recipe to keep from getting duplicate messages: :0 Wh: msgid.lock $FORMAIL -D 8192 .msgid.cache It keeps a list of all message id's sent to you and deletes duplicates. Great for instances such as this. (it's been useful for me because of all the lists I am on) Also, if you have procmail, you can mung your own reply-to into lists that don't use it. http://www.wecs.com/replytorc.htm Christopher Fisk -- I WILL NOT BURY THE NEW KID I WILL NOT BURY THE NEW KID Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 9F03 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
> Yes, but the point of the list is to tell the list, not that one person > alone. Had all 7 replies been to the OP, then no one else who wanted the > answer, now or in the future, would know what the answer was. The broken 'reply to' means that you don't have to think about where your replies go, a shortcut I'm sure many folks like but is not a good thing IMHO. A working 'reply to' means that each responder must consider whether the information they're returning is something the list needs to know or if it's specific for the OP. Had all seven replied to the OP does not mean the answer would have lost; as many have pointed out a simple google search would have delivered the same information. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Mike Noble wrote: Holly is so correct here, all replies should go back to the list. If you want to make a reply to the specific person, you know that you want to change the behavior and you make a conscious effort to change the the address to which the message is being sent. I understand what you're saying and agree... mostly. Most e-mail clients (i.e. Thunderbird, Eudora, opera, and mutt to name a few) are almost a usability nightmare. They don't provide sufficient control over fundamental things such as reply addresses. Simply taking the reply problem alone, they are a series of well-known patterns for reply that are not supported in most clients. The ability to edit the recipient list is filled with opportunities for the user to screw up and not recover. so instead of complaining, I wish folks would just fix their favorite client. ---eric -- http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.03/view.html?pg=5 The result of the duopoly that currently defines "competition" is that prices and service suck. We're the world's leader in Internet technology - except that we're not. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Holly Bostick wrote: Don't forget also changing CC: for the list to To: and the fact that anyone who doesn't feel like removing those additional entries will double my incoming mail for any thread I have responded to (because I'm in the CC so I get it personally, and I get it from the list). I agree, in fact, I will probably end up replying to the wrong person on some threads, which can become annoying. But that said, if you have access to procmail you can use the following recipe to keep from getting duplicate messages: :0 Wh: msgid.lock | $FORMAIL -D 8192 .msgid.cache It keeps a list of all message id's sent to you and deletes duplicates. Great for instances such as this. (it's been useful for me because of all the lists I am on) Christopher Fisk -- Now, son, you don't want to drink beer. That's for daddys, and kids with fake IDs. -- Homer Simpson, The Springfield Files -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 12:31 pm, Mike Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The best thing that the gentoo server could do would be that every mail > that comes into the server re-writes the Reply-To so that it always > sends mail back to the list. No, that's not the best thing. It break emails that use the reply-to header for it's original (and standards-compliant) behavior. It may be easy, but that doesn't make it right. Please read, if you haven't already, the document Andrea linked. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 11:49 am, Andrea Barisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm sick and tired of witnessing how difficult it is to reasonably > change a few headers in this mailing lists. While I acknolewdge the fact > that it's best to warn users before doing something like this I also > find unmanageable and useless any form of 'voting' for this kind of > issues. Stripping the Reply-To looked and still looks like a "sensible" > choice and easily manageable with a decent MUA and some basic > configrations skills. But apparently my presumptions of considering this > an "easy" change was mistaken and probably leaving the old setup is the > best choice since I have no time to discuss this and tell people how to > configure their MUA. I agree with you on all counts. While munging reply-to *is* broken, I think you did the right thing. Hopefully, we will be able to move to the correct use of reply-to at some point in the future. For all those that think munging the reply-to is correct, please read the document Andrea linked. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Holly Bostick wrote: | | Yes, but the point of the list is to tell the list, not that one person | alone. Had all 7 replies been to the OP, then no one else who wanted the | answer, now or in the future, would know what the answer was. | | In which case, what is the purpose of having a public list at all? | | Or should we coordinate our replies so that only one answer appears? | | Or are you saying that OT questions should not be answered on the list, | but privately, in which case somebody has to publish some rules for what | precisely constitutes OT on a very general list such as this. | | By such rules, your own post would be OT, so I guess I should have | responded privately, or you should have just emailed Andrea privately in | the first place. | | I really must be missing something here. | | Holly | Holly is so correct here, all replies should go back to the list. If you want to make a reply to the specific person, you know that you want to change the behavior and you make a conscious effort to change the the address to which the message is being sent. I know that today I sent two messages back to the people who originally posted when I really wanted it to go back to the list. Yes I was not thinking and just did a reply (which should have gone to the list). Mike - -- Mike Noble Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key ID: 0xFFDFC13B Key fingerprint: 8204 1297 B9AD 0CED 2FCE 1FB0 9491 5824 FFDF C13B Keyserver: http://pgpkeys.mit.edu -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCHONelJFYJP/fwTsRAsG7AJ0TwM0hbwJ52MZkyA2KRYThhVfb6QCfUrqd 9gn9cvD+5lnoV8vhlc4avaM= =5oCw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Dave Nebinger wrote: This is a perfect example of why the 'reply to' thing was originally broken, recently fixed, and today reset back to the broken state. One person posts an OT message that is quite easily resolved by doing a simple google search. But since the 'reply to' is broken again, we get 7 different replies telling the whole list, rather than the one person, how to find out what the acronym means. Yes, but the point of the list is to tell the list, not that one person alone. Had all 7 replies been to the OP, then no one else who wanted the answer, now or in the future, would know what the answer was. In which case, what is the purpose of having a public list at all? Or should we coordinate our replies so that only one answer appears? Or are you saying that OT questions should not be answered on the list, but privately, in which case somebody has to publish some rules for what precisely constitutes OT on a very general list such as this. By such rules, your own post would be OT, so I guess I should have responded privately, or you should have just emailed Andrea privately in the first place. I really must be missing something here. Holly Andrea, I'm sorry if you felt flogged by folks wanting the old modus operandi in place; you were right in the first place to have fixed the 'reply to'. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
A perfect example - was RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
This is a perfect example of why the 'reply to' thing was originally broken, recently fixed, and today reset back to the broken state. One person posts an OT message that is quite easily resolved by doing a simple google search. But since the 'reply to' is broken again, we get 7 different replies telling the whole list, rather than the one person, how to find out what the acronym means. Andrea, I'm sorry if you felt flogged by folks wanting the old modus operandi in place; you were right in the first place to have fixed the 'reply to'. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Thanks, I was unaware of that particular resource. I use (whether I like it or not, no MS flames please) Outlook to read email, so I will just have to create a short cut. Dennis -Original Message- From: Holly Bostick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread Dennis Taylor wrote: > Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been > out of circulation for a few years could find out what things > like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember > from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me > clueless. > Mail User Agent. If you use Firefox or Thunderbird, you might consider adding the Acronym Finder to your search engines available in the search box; otherwise, the site can be found at http://www.acronymfinder.com/ and you can just type your unknown acronym in there. It's pretty good, actually. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
> > Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. > Which mail client has that? kmail. If you hit the reply button and hold it (or hit the right key to set it directly) you can choose from four forms of reply. Reply, Reply to the sender, reply to all, reply to the the mailing list. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:28:03 -0500, Dennis Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been > out of circulation for a few years could find out what things > like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember > from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me > clueless. > Google is your friend ... search : mua acronym MUA Mail User Agent (Internet email) regards, Jean-Francois -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Holly Bostick wrote: Dennis Taylor wrote: Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been out of circulation for a few years could find out what things like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me clueless. Mail User Agent. If you use Firefox or Thunderbird, you might consider adding the Acronym Finder to your search engines available in the search box; This should have been 'Firefox or Mozilla', of course. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Sites such as http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/ or wikipedia are usually pretty good at showing acronym definitions. FYI, It's Mail User Agent. Dennis Taylor wrote: Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been out of circulation for a few years could find out what things like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me clueless. -Original Message- From: Holly Bostick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken Andrea Barisani wrote: and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time to discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- This site uses frames And yet your browser does not. One of these will change. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Dennis Taylor wrote: Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been out of circulation for a few years could find out what things like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me clueless. Mail User Agent. If you use Firefox or Thunderbird, you might consider adding the Acronym Finder to your search engines available in the search box; otherwise, the site can be found at http://www.acronymfinder.com/ and you can just type your unknown acronym in there. It's pretty good, actually. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 12:28 pm, Dennis Taylor wrote: > acronym http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?p=dict&String=exact&Acronym=MUA pgpGca5dY10aN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - Original Message Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:32:23 -0800 From: Mike Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Holly Bostick wrote: | | | | Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. | Which mail client has that? | | |> |> Well, Thunderbird only supports "Reply" and "Reply All". If I do |> "Reply All" I have to manually intervene and remove the sender's |> mail-address. | | | Don't forget also changing CC: for the list to To: and the fact that | anyone who doesn't feel like removing those additional entries will | double my incoming mail for any thread I have responded to (because I'm | in the CC so I get it personally, and I get it from the list). | |> But I guess that's not a reasonable mailer | | | And I guess it doesn't matter that I now have to manage duplicated mail | traffic for no reason or choice of my own. It's getting a bit tedious | already. | |> |> Or is there a way to configure Thunderbird to do this? | | | Not that I've noticed, but if you read the link, apparently this is the | user's own problem to deal with... for some reason the author feels that | it's perfectly all right to mass-mail the same mail to somebody by using | Reply-All (i.e., if you're too lazy to edit your headers before sending, | then that's your problem. Which may be true). | | |> |>> Take a look at this: |>> |>> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html |> |> |> In the 34768 messages I have read on this list, I have not once read |> an embarrassing message about anybody's sex-life or boss :( | | | I get it that munging is bad, but the alternative is not all that much | better... if it's going to be a big PITA to post to this list, I'm not | going to do it so much (please hold your cheers of celebration to the | end, thank you). Naturally, it's not about "me" per se, but I'm sure I'm | not the only one who might not shoot off a quick solution to a posted | problem, simply because all this editing and management I must do makes | it much more difficult to shoot off a quick anything. | | | Holly | -- | gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list | | I have really gotten tired of this thread about people who have no clue about how to use a mail reader and being on lists. The best thing that the gentoo server could do would be that every mail that comes into the server re-writes the Reply-To so that it always sends mail back to the list. This way it does not matter if you use gmail (which always sends back to gmail). As for the person above who likes to Reply to all, he will just have to use Reply and never use reply to all on a mailing list, learn how to use your mail tool. Sorry for the rant. Mike - -- Mike Noble Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key ID: 0xFFDFC13B Key fingerprint: 8204 1297 B9AD 0CED 2FCE 1FB0 9491 5824 FFDF C13B Keyserver: http://pgpkeys.mit.edu -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCHMwUlJFYJP/fwTsRAm/WAJwKXBQfJz6032kwkHDe6eIY6VqJKwCfTNK1 pPGH6N6kivLWD84AI6X5Ze8= =jEJJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken-- OT question stimulated by this thread
Do we have an acronym list so that those of us who have been out of circulation for a few years could find out what things like MUA mean? Many of them I can guess, and some I remember from years ago, but I have recently seen many that leave me clueless. -Original Message- From: Holly Bostick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken Andrea Barisani wrote: > and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time to > discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. > Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:52:08 +, Mike Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 23 February 2005 17:21, John Myers wrote: > > > Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. > > > Which mail client has that? > > > > KMail does. If you press 'L' on a list message, it does reply-to-list. > > KMail also seems to get the reply to address right anyway. > (I don't have anything setup to tell it gentoo-user is in this folder, except > a list-id filter to put messages here) > There are a few things to be learned from this (and several other) thread(s) whcih have been quite animated, to say the least. These "truths" seem obvious to me, but not so obvious to those who maintain the gentoo lists and others who have jumped into the fray. 1. It's NEVER (yes I'm shouting) a good idea to change existing list behavior without notifying the user base and (apparently) without testing the changes in a limited environment. The result of doing this blindly is almost always a lot of flailing around instead of an orderly process. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" also comes to mind. 2. Advance notification of changes (and not just a "we're making some changes," "you get to figure out what they are") is always a very good idea (tm). 3. It seems totally impossible to root out the attitude "Gentoo is for gurus/admins who know every trick in the book, and the rest of you Lusers can just lump it." Unfortunately, not every subscriber to the list is a master of the email headers, the ways of manipulating these headers, and the myriad ways that various email clients handle the headers. Some Lusers just want to read their mail and to be able to reply to the list without a lot of headaches. I don't find suggestions that the Lusers should just go find another list to be very helpful. Sigh. -- Collins -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
> That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. ...or - at the very least - we'd have a quick way to answer folks with questions about this sort of thing... ;) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Andrea Barisani wrote: and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time to discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. Anybody have the time and knowledge to write something for the docs page about basic MUA configuration for the most common MUAs in use on Gentoo (mutt, pine, KMail, Thunderbird/MozMail)? That way, both the admin and the users could be comfortable. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 17:21, John Myers wrote: > > Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. > > Which mail client has that? > > KMail does. If you press 'L' on a list message, it does reply-to-list. KMail also seems to get the reply to address right anyway. (I don't have anything setup to tell it gentoo-user is in this folder, except a list-id filter to put messages here) -- Mike Williams pgpLLTAcjvsZd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 06:00:40PM +0100, Holly Bostick wrote: > > > > > >Well, Thunderbird only supports "Reply" and "Reply All". If I do "Reply > >All" I have to manually intervene and remove the sender's mail-address. > > Don't forget also changing CC: for the list to To: and the fact that > anyone who doesn't feel like removing those additional entries will > double my incoming mail for any thread I have responded to (because I'm > in the CC so I get it personally, and I get it from the list). > > >But I guess that's not a reasonable mailer > > And I guess it doesn't matter that I now have to manage duplicated mail > traffic for no reason or choice of my own. It's getting a bit tedious > already. > > > > >Or is there a way to configure Thunderbird to do this? > > Not that I've noticed, but if you read the link, apparently this is the > user's own problem to deal with... for some reason the author feels that > it's perfectly all right to mass-mail the same mail to somebody by using > Reply-All (i.e., if you're too lazy to edit your headers before sending, > then that's your problem. Which may be true). > > > > > >>Take a look at this: > >> > >>http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > > >In the 34768 messages I have read on this list, I have not once read an > >embarrassing message about anybody's sex-life or boss :( > > I get it that munging is bad, but the alternative is not all that much > better... if it's going to be a big PITA to post to this list, I'm not > going to do it so much (please hold your cheers of celebration to the > end, thank you). Naturally, it's not about "me" per se, but I'm sure I'm > not the only one who might not shoot off a quick solution to a posted > problem, simply because all this editing and management I must do makes > it much more difficult to shoot off a quick anything. I'm sick and tired of witnessing how difficult it is to reasonably change a few headers in this mailing lists. While I acknolewdge the fact that it's best to warn users before doing something like this I also find unmanageable and useless any form of 'voting' for this kind of issues. Stripping the Reply-To looked and still looks like a "sensible" choice and easily manageable with a decent MUA and some basic configrations skills. But apparently my presumptions of considering this an "easy" change was mistaken and probably leaving the old setup is the best choice since I have no time to discuss this and tell people how to configure their MUA. Reply-To has just been restored. Cheers -- Andrea Barisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.*. Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer V ( ) GPG-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc ( ) 0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E^^_^^ -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 09:00, Holly Bostick wrote: > Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. > Which mail client has that? KMail does. If you press 'L' on a list message, it does reply-to-list. -- t3h 3l3ctr0n3rd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Supermarket Deli Clerk and Student Programmer OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 0A65 EEFA B23A F0AC E6C2 C71C BEA0 E055 BE0E EC25 pgpqmC0zaeRVr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Arnstein Oseland wrote: Andrea Barisani wrote: On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:41:40PM +0100, Andreas Vinsander wrote: Hi! Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the list... is that an intentional change? I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list The Reply-To header is useless since all MUA supports the "reply to list/all/sender" functions and usually reply-to should be set by the person who's sending the message. Reply to list? That would be a great thing, if I/Thunderbird had that. Which mail client has that? Well, Thunderbird only supports "Reply" and "Reply All". If I do "Reply All" I have to manually intervene and remove the sender's mail-address. Don't forget also changing CC: for the list to To: and the fact that anyone who doesn't feel like removing those additional entries will double my incoming mail for any thread I have responded to (because I'm in the CC so I get it personally, and I get it from the list). But I guess that's not a reasonable mailer And I guess it doesn't matter that I now have to manage duplicated mail traffic for no reason or choice of my own. It's getting a bit tedious already. Or is there a way to configure Thunderbird to do this? Not that I've noticed, but if you read the link, apparently this is the user's own problem to deal with... for some reason the author feels that it's perfectly all right to mass-mail the same mail to somebody by using Reply-All (i.e., if you're too lazy to edit your headers before sending, then that's your problem. Which may be true). Take a look at this: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html In the 34768 messages I have read on this list, I have not once read an embarrassing message about anybody's sex-life or boss :( I get it that munging is bad, but the alternative is not all that much better... if it's going to be a big PITA to post to this list, I'm not going to do it so much (please hold your cheers of celebration to the end, thank you). Naturally, it's not about "me" per se, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who might not shoot off a quick solution to a posted problem, simply because all this editing and management I must do makes it much more difficult to shoot off a quick anything. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Andrea Barisani wrote: On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:41:40PM +0100, Andreas Vinsander wrote: Hi! Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the list... is that an intentional change? I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list The Reply-To header is useless since all MUA supports the "reply to list/all/sender" functions and usually reply-to should be set by the person who's sending the message. Well, Thunderbird only supports "Reply" and "Reply All". If I do "Reply All" I have to manually intervene and remove the sender's mail-address. But I guess that's not a reasonable mailer Or is there a way to configure Thunderbird to do this? Take a look at this: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html In the 34768 messages I have read on this list, I have not once read an embarrassing message about anybody's sex-life or boss :( Best regards, Arnstein -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 04:44:12PM +0100, Holly Bostick wrote: > > It's a simple question: "The list behaviour has changed; is it going to > change back, or not?" It's not going to change back unless big problems related to this are detected/reported. This will also be set on all other gentoo ml when the migration to the new server will be completed. We are still in the middle of the migration but a detailed email with all the changes will be posted soon. Bye -- Andrea Barisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.*. Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer V ( ) GPG-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc ( ) 0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E^^_^^ -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Andrea Barisani wrote: On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:41:40PM +0100, Andreas Vinsander wrote: Hi! Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the list... is that an intentional change? I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list The Reply-To header is useless since all MUA supports the "reply to list/all/sender" functions and usually reply-to should be set by the person who's sending the message. Take a look at this: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Cheers Oh blessed gods, let's not start this again. It's a simple question: "The list behaviour has changed; is it going to change back, or not?" Does anyone know the answer? I don't want to hear why one behaviour is better than the other, I just want to know what the behaviour is going to be. Thank you. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:41:40PM +0100, Andreas Vinsander wrote: > Hi! > > Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the > list... is that an intentional change? > > I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. > > /Andreas > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list > The Reply-To header is useless since all MUA supports the "reply to list/all/sender" functions and usually reply-to should be set by the person who's sending the message. Take a look at this: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Cheers -- Andrea Barisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.*. Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer V ( ) GPG-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc ( ) 0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E^^_^^ "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate" -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Reply-To: header seems broken
Hi! Seems like the Reply-To: header for this list no longer point to the list... is that an intentional change? I would appreciate having the old behaviour instead. /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
Collins Richey wrote: Simple fix: use sylpheed or sylpheed-claws. There are probably some other mailers that are smart enough to extract the mailing-list directive from the headers and do the right thing (reply to list) when Reply is selected. When sylpheed starts to handle IMAP in a sensible manner, sure. MAL -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 15:04:10 +0100 MAL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Gaffney wrote: > > Is there an easy way to reply to just a list instead of the list and the > > original sender in Mozilla 1.4? > > Annoyingly, Mozilla _does_ reply to just the list, (at least on > gentoo-user, or any list with the Reply-To header set), whether you > press Reply or Reply-To. I consider this a bug, and have had a report > filed for ages. > > "Reply" should reply to the Reply-To header. > > "Reply All" should reply to both the sender and whatever is supplied in > the Reply-To header, and, (I think), any other recipients. > Simple fix: use sylpheed or sylpheed-claws. There are probably some other mailers that are smart enough to extract the mailing-list directive from the headers and do the right thing (reply to list) when Reply is selected. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area if you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
Andrew Gaffney wrote: Is there an easy way to reply to just a list instead of the list and the original sender in Mozilla 1.4? Annoyingly, Mozilla _does_ reply to just the list, (at least on gentoo-user, or any list with the Reply-To header set), whether you press Reply or Reply-To. I consider this a bug, and have had a report filed for ages. "Reply" should reply to the Reply-To header. "Reply All" should reply to both the sender and whatever is supplied in the Reply-To header, and, (I think), any other recipients. MAL -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
Eh, that's what I thought. BlueRibbon wrote: I think that the reply address is defined on the Reply-To header of the email message, so there's no way for you to automagically select the one you want. You can is do Reply-all and erase the addresses you don't want to msg back to. Andrew Gaffney wrote: Is there an easy way to reply to just a list instead of the list and the original sender in Mozilla 1.4? -- Andrew Gaffney -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
I think that the reply address is defined on the Reply-To header of the email message, so there's no way for you to automagically select the one you want. You can is do Reply-all and erase the addresses you don't want to msg back to. Andrew Gaffney wrote: Is there an easy way to reply to just a list instead of the list and the original sender in Mozilla 1.4? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] reply-to list in Mozilla
Is there an easy way to reply to just a list instead of the list and the original sender in Mozilla 1.4? -- Andrew Gaffney -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] Reply-To !
To whoever did it. Dude, you rock! :P -- Mike Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
