On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 11:11 +0200, Andrea Barisani wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 06:06:18PM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote: > > maillog: 14/04/2005-11:01:19(+0200): Andrea Barisani types > > > I'm prefectly happy with removing our reply-to header (and leaving > > > user_defined one if any) if the userbase of this ml is happy to deal > > > without > > > it. > > > > Are you gonna start a poll on the forums? > > > > Starting a poll on *forums* about a *ml*, no thanks :). Hope you were being > sarcastic. I'm open to suggestions other than the "remove the header and let > the > flames come" option which unfortunately looks like the only one to me and > despite being "right" in many regards I fear it will cause the havoc that > we've experienced on gentoo-user.
I vote for removing them. As stated in the bug, it is really annoying to have to copy and paste the sender's address when you want to reply to only them. This applies to -core, too. Personally, I think they should either be unset by the list software, or, if possible, stripped. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
