On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:12 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Frank Lin PIAT <fp...@klabs.be> writes: > > > If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list: > > If I select "Reply": > > To=mailing-list > > CC= > > If I select "Reply to all": > > To=mailing-list > > CC=Previous email's recipient. > > > > If the sender of the previous mail was NOT subscribed to the list. > > If I select "Reply": > > To=sender,mailing-list > > CC= > > If I select "Reply to all": > > To=sender,mailing-list > > CC=Previous email's recipient. > > > > => Do you agree with this? Can we forward it to list-masters?
> Gnus has two reply functions, which it calls "reply" and "follow-up" > using the old Usenet definitions. [..] > > Note the capacity for private reply. Any system that doesn't allow for > a private reply to the sender is unacceptably broken in my opinion. The whole m-l / CoC problem comes from the assumption that all MUAs have advanced features, that are properly configured, and end-user have good understanding of what to do. If we can't achieve a reasonable behavior using Joe User's two-buttons-MUA, then it's guaranteed that this discussion will come over again and again. Note that at the moment, my MUA (Evolution) has three buttons. None behave "correctly" for mailing lists: Reply = Reply to sender only Reply to all = reply to all previous sender and recipients Reply to list = Reply to list only, dropping non-subscribed sender. Any improved proposal ? or Do we have to change the policy? Regards, Franklin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org