Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" <sa...@lyx.org> het volgende: > > Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > > No, because you're forcing your will onto others. If I want to reply to > > you, I don't want you to overrule me by sending my reply to the list. > > :) > Vincent, you don't want to reply to me. you simply don't have email client (or > at least at the time we flamed about it) which knows reply to list and thus you > always reply to all.
Yes, back then that was the main reason. Now Thunderbird knows about it, but GMail still doesn't. > otherwise there is no point in CC-ing people who read the list. i must be subscribed > to at least 10 OSS mailing lists and there is no such rule that "reply-to-all" should > be used as you claim. > Git mailing list has this rule. So every poster to our lists must be subscribed to it and should follow the list closely for quite some time to see whether someone answers his question? > my (admitedly) wrong usage of reply-to: was triggered by the fact that more > people on this list blindly use reply-to-all, quite contrary to Lars statement > about 'carefully' selected list of CCs. In 99.9% of cases I was just spammed by > blind CCs. Yes. my concern was not about double mails but mainly about mails being > sorted to wrong folders, because CC-ed mails don't have headers modified from > listserver which can be simply used by procmail. > > pavel Well, one person doesn't want to switch to procmail, so we can't reply to all. The other did switch to procmail, which also is a reason we can't reply to all. Vincent
