Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-10 Thread Fungi4All
From: joel.r...@gmail.com > And Now Google Doesn't Think Users Should Ever Set Headers. > Progress is progress. Yeah. Progress is progress. ahem. Sorry. I guess I forgot something. {irony}Progress is progress.{end-irony} -- Joel Rees If you live in a cave this may actually have some meaning amo

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-10 Thread Joel Rees
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Fungi4All wrote: > UTC Time: June 10, 2017 2:13 AM > > From: joel.r...@gmail.com > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George wrote: >> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit : >>> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-10 Thread Fungi4All
UTC Time: June 10, 2017 2:13 AM From: joel.r...@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit : >> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are >> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect. > > Not

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-09 Thread Joel Rees
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit : >> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are >> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect. > > Not if the list is properly configured. > > Debian's lists are

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-09 Thread The Wanderer
On 2017-06-09 at 11:57, Nicolas George wrote: > Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit : > >> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are >> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect. > > Not if the list is properly configured. What configuration would avoi

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-09 Thread Nicolas George
Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit : > Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are > subscribed to the list, which is incorrect. Not if the list is properly configured. Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users, but the users

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

2017-06-09 Thread Gene Heskett
On Friday 09 June 2017 10:47:29 Nicolas George wrote: > Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit : > > When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to > > All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are > > answering. > > This recommendation is un

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

2017-06-09 Thread Fungi4All
UTC Time: June 9, 2017 2:47 PM From: geo...@nsup.org To: Charlie Kravetz debian-user@lists.debian.org Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit : > When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to > All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are >

Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

2017-06-09 Thread The Wanderer
On 2017-06-09 at 10:47, Nicolas George wrote: > Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit : > >> When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to >> All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are >> answering. > > This recommendation is unsustain

Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

2017-06-09 Thread Nicolas George
Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit : > When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to > All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are > answering. This recommendation is unsustainable and should be eliminated from the guidelines. It only