On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 07:59:17AM +0100, Shaun McDonald wrote: > Take a look at > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > and stop bickering about the way you have to reply to the mailing list. >
My mailer, mutt, has a List-reply that does *exactly* what I want, i.e. it finds the talk@openstreetmap.org adress from List-Id or such. But, this isn't really the point: I'm *still* in favour of adding reply-to to the list. It might be technical wrong, but: Getting outlook and other proprietary mailers to behave is a lost battle, there are fights more worthwhile to fight :) Such as the fight for free map-data ;-) So even though it doesn't bother me personally, the way it is no, I say that the above document is outdated - an email-list (especially one like talk) *is* a forum, and replys should per default go to the list. Anyone not wanting to send to the list, will have the info to do that anyways. And for the only semi-technical argument that you break something that can't be repaired: I have *never* ever placed a reply-to to something other than my from-adress, and expected it to work, without *also* stating explicitly at the end of the mail. And I rather make the from-header be the adress I want replys to, if I want to do it permanently. So I say: Let's be pragmatic and do what most people feel is the most logical thing. And most people will *not* have sensible mailers. -- - Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
