Everyone who has seen the Reply-To argument before should either skip this mail, or read my very last paragraph, as it describes new Mailman functionality that *may* obselete this argument. Replies to slug-chat (I set the header myself!)
On Fri, Apr 04, 2003, Dave Airlie wrote: > > included, otherwise, like you, if I hit "Reply" it only goes to the private > > address of the sender, which, in my opinion, is broken, meaning that "Reply" > > *should* default to the slug address. > > This is something that comes up on every list all the time, neither way is > truly broken, its like KDE vs GNOME or vi vs emacs, so you should say > really, "in my opinion, is not an ideal configuration". The arguments against and for setting replies to go to the list are here: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml You'll find that the vast majority of Linux and Free Software mailing lists do *not* set Reply-To the list - that is, the vast majority are like the SLUG lists. This herd effect is part of the reason I don't like to have the Reply-To set to point to the list - people will have to deal with the group-reply or list-reply solution at some point. Important note: SLUG now uses Mailman 2.1. If you go to http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug and go to the box where you can edit our subscription options, you'll see a "Avoid duplicate copies of messages?". People who really hate receiving two copies when someone replies to them might find this useful. (Yes, procmail users, if you filter on something other than TO_ this still means the mails will go to the wrong place - I do this too, hence I don't use the "Avoid duplicate copies of messages?" feature, but it's still worth pointing out.) -Mary -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
