I think the problem is "reply all". Even your message was "To:
@robin.gentoo.org", with "Reply-to: @gentoo.org", so if I had hit
reply-all in thunderbird instead of reply, two copies would have gone out.
My guess is mail clients are doing the right thing, but people get in
the habit of using repl
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think the problem is "reply all". Even your message was "To:
> @robin.gentoo.org", with "Reply-to: @gentoo.org", so if I had hit
> reply-all in thunderbird instead of reply, two copies would have gone out.
>
> My guess is mail clients are doing the rig
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Graham Murray wrote:
I disagree. Reply to all is (normally) the correct way of sending a
reply to a mailing list. Using 'reply' should send a private email to
the poster of the message. If the mail client is 'doing the right
thing', then it will just send the message to the mai
Graham Murray wrote:
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think the problem is "reply all". Even your message was "To:
@robin.gentoo.org", with "Reply-to: @gentoo.org", so if I had hit
reply-all in thunderbird instead of reply, two copies would have gone out.
My guess is mail clients are doi
Graham Murray wrote:
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think the problem is "reply all". Even your message was "To:
@robin.gentoo.org", with "Reply-to: @gentoo.org", so if I had hit
reply-all in thunderbird instead of reply, two copies would have gone out.
My guess is mail clients are do
Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why? Isn't the point of replying to a mailing list to send the response
> to the sender, which is the list?
Yes, which is why the correct response for the mailing list software
is to send replies to the list and not to the author of the message
being r
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:48:19 +0100, Graham Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why? Isn't the point of replying to a mailing list to send the response
> > to the sender, which is the list?
>
> Yes, which is why the correct response for the mailing l
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 06:06:51AM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:48:19 +0100, Graham Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Why? Isn't the point of replying to a mailing list to send the response
> > > to the sender, which is
See my new bug report against Thunderbird:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=288020
-Richard
Richard Fish wrote:
>I think the problem is "reply all". Even your message was "To:
>@robin.gentoo.org", with "Reply-to: @gentoo.org", so if I had hit
>reply-all in thunderbird instead of re
Anyway, I'll do my bit to remember that this list and only this
list requires me to hit reply where as all the others I'm all require
me to hit reply-to.
Heat suit on,
Mark
I have never really been able to work out what goes on with these
things... FWIW, I can certainly say that more than 70%
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:02:51 +0200 Antoine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I have never really been able to work out what goes on with these
| things... FWIW, I can certainly say that more than 70% of the lists I
| subscribe to have the gentoo behaviour - and it annoys the hell out of
| me to use th
Nick Rout wrote:
Whatever the answer is, it will be the same no matter how many times you
repeat the email!
In other words, could those of you who still have their mail clients set to
To: gentoo-user@gentoo.org
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please adjust your clients to just mail to the list? The robin bu
12 matches
Mail list logo
