I was the first person to respond actually. On 4 August 2012 08:50, Ramchandra Apte <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
