You can use the _winreg <http://docs.python.org/library/_winreg.html> module. I posted this message earlier but I replied to OP, not replied to all.
On 4 August 2012 08:00, Steven D'Aprano <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/08/12 06:32, Walter Prins wrote: > >> On 3 August 2012 19:35, Alan >> Gauld<alan.gauld@btinternet.**com<[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >>> The list doesn't care, you probably did it by hitting Reply >>> instead of Reply All. >>> >>> Reply replies to the person who posted. Reply All replies to all >>> on the list. Just like regular email. >>> >> >> That's just how its set up, to mimic normal email. >>> >> >> Well normally I expect emails from a list (being the direct sender), >> to go back to the sender, e.g. the list, and emails directly from a >> person to go back to that person. (Differently put, I expect *any* >> email to by default go back to the sender, in general, unless I >> specify otherwise. So if a mailing list sends me an email, my default >> expectation is that the mail goes back to the list, unless I specify >> otherwise. This seems perfectly intuitive to me, but hey ho what the >> hey. :) ) >> > > > The problem with that reasoning is that the list is *not* the sender. It's > just a rely that handles list management and delivery. If you reply to a > paper letter from Aunt Tilly, would you expect it to be delivered to the > postman who delivered it to you? > > There is a long, acrimonious debate about the behaviour of mailing lists. > Some people, like you, want the mailing list to hack the "Reply To" address > so that replies go back to the list instead of the sender. The biggest > argument in favour of that is simplicity: you just hit "Reply" on any email > and the reply goes to the appropriate place: the list for list mail, and > the actual sender for private mail. > > The biggest argument against is that it encourages a particular failure > mode, where the recipient goes to make a private reply, says something > personal or embarrassing, but forgets to change the address away from the > public list. > > (My personal answer to that is, carelessness is not the mailing list's > fault. If you are writing something private and can't be bothered checking > who you are sending too, that's your problem.) > > Others consider that mangling the Reply To address is an abomination, and > insist that it is a horrible abuse of Internet standards, and that it's no > big deal to just hit Reply All. Which is wrong because it's a pain in the > arse to get two copies of every nearly every email. (Some mailing list > software is smart enough to not send you a second copy, but most isn't. > Some mail clients are smart enough to detect duplicate emails and throw one > away, but most don't, and even those that do only do so *after* the email > has been downloaded from the server. > > Also, the problem with the "purity" behaviour is that it encourages n00bs > and the careless to take conversations off-list. > > It's an imperfect world, and neither solution is right all the time. I > have gradually moved away from the "lists should change the Reply To > address" camp to a third camp, which is to insist on better tools. If your > mail client doesn't give you a simple "Reply To List" command, then your > mail client is crap. Some non-crap mail programs include Thunderbird, mutt, > and Kmail. One crap one is apparently Gmail. > > > See: > > http://woozle.org/~neale/**papers/reply-to-still-harmful.**html<http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html> > > which I don't entirely agree with -- the author makes claims about what > people want, apparently without realising that the reason for the debate is > that not all people want the same thing. In my opinion, he panders too much > to the careless and stupid -- I have negative sympathy for anyone who sends > private mail to a public address because they didn't bother to glance at > where it was going before hitting Send. And he fails to consider the > obvious answer that if the Reply To address is for the sender to set to > whatever they like, all a mailing list need do is make "you agree that > replies will go to the list" a condition of joining a list, and then the > mailing list software, acting as your agent, is entitled to mangled the > Reply To address. > > And of course, we still have the problem of human laziness and stupidity. > It is *astonishing* how many people apparently have problems with the > concept: > > "Before you reply to an email, decide whether you want to reply to the > sender alone, the group, or the mailing list." > > They'll insist on having a choice between 45 different coffees at > Starbucks, but can't cope with the choice between 3 different types of > reply. > > > > -- > Steven > > ______________________________**_________________ > Tutor maillist - [email protected] > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > http://mail.python.org/**mailman/listinfo/tutor<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor> >
_______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change subscription options: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
