At 07:20 AM 9/23/2004, Mladen Turk wrote:
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list itself. I
think almost all other lists has the 'Replay-To' header set to the
list itself. I mean, I'm receiving the messages from the
Greg Marr wrote:
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list itself.
Search for
reply-to considered harmful
on Google and you'll find more information than you ever wanted to read
about both sides of the issue.
If you
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:20:49 +0200, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list itself.
the reason NOT to do it is that it is unintuitive to most people
(okay, just me and
From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 2:50 PM
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:20:49 +0200, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Mladen Turk wrote:
I found myself couple of times replying to the original sender
by default, while my intention was to reply to the list.
The solution is either to 'reply to all' (why would anyone
wish to receive two messages about the same subject?) or doing
that by
