> -----Original Message----- > From: Chad Perrin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 6:14 PM > To: beginners@perl.org > Subject: Re: problem with whitespace not splitting on split. > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 08:42:51AM -0500, Rance Hall wrote: > > > > some mail readers are probably capable of reading the list header and > > figuring it out, but I bet others don't (like mine) > > I use Mutt, which allows me to list-reply, but without setting up custom > configurations it doesn't use list-reply without being specifically told > to do so. As such, I either give it a custom configuration, or I have > to use a different method of replying than the standard reply command > (using the r key for replies) if I want it to go to the list. I'll > probably set up custom config for it to check for list-reply first, > though then I have to figure out how to make it easy for me to skip to > individual replying if/when I want to do so without having to use a > group reply and delete extra recipients (such as the list and myself). > Not all that big a hardship, but it seems like kind of a suboptimal way > to run a mailing list.
The choice of munging the reply-to is left up to the list manager, really, and (hopefully) is determined by the type/flow of traffic on the list. In some cases, it makes sense to set the reply-to, in others, not. I run some announcement mailing lists for the purposes of notifying clients about maintenance, product releases, etc. I want all internal users to be able to use the lists and all external replies to come back to me. I do this because there isn't much return traffic. If any do come through, it's because a recipient doesn't want to receive the messages or no longer exists and is bounced. For my case, it makes sense. For this list, the managers give you the option to reply to the poster or the list. I think that's the proper approach in this context. Read this for an argument against forcing the reply-to header: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Personally, I don't mind it either way as I always double-check my replies and their destinations to be sure they're what I intended. Just because email is fast and convenient, doesn't mean that we should ignore simple steps such as double-checking ourselves. I mean, you wouldn't forget to check the number of zeroes you wrote on that check to the utility company, would you? ry > > Er, that was more than I intended to say on the subject. > > By checking the headers, I see that you're using Thunderbird. I'm > surprised that it doesn't support list-reply. Are you saying that it > doesn't recognize the list-reply header at all, or that it doesn't > default to list-reply when it exists, or something else entirely? > > -- > Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ] > "The ability to quote is a serviceable > substitute for wit." - W. Somerset Maugham > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
