Peter Decker wrote: > On 10/3/05, Roel Schroeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Indeed, and that's by design: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > > Of course, that's only one side of the argument: > > http://www.blackgate.net/consulting/reply-to_munging_useful.html > > On lists like this, where everyone benefits by sharing information, it > seems pretty lame to hide behind purist arguments about Reply-To: > headers. The default behavior should be the one most useful to the > list. Think for a moment how many useful bits of information you've > missed because the default for this list it to make conversations > private.
The default of this list is not to make conversations private; in fact the list doesn't have any default. It's you who chooses to send replies to the original author, to the list, or both, by choosing which button to press in your mail client. Unfortunately AFAIK most of the popular mail clients don't offer a 'Reply to list' button. Even mutt only offers that functionality of you manually define all your mailing lists. But that's a design problem in these clients, not in the mailing list software. Not that it matters that much to me, since I read practically all mailing lists via gmane.org. That turns the lists into newsgroups, where the reply button (follow-up, more accurately) does send the reply to the newsgroup. -- If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton Roel Schroeven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
