Sorry, for the late reply but found the message in the Spamfolder...
Am 2009-04-29 10:35:08, schrieb Giacomo A. Catenazzi:
> But you fail also on pragmatic level:
> a lot of discussions are stopped because of lack of CC:
> Take debian-legal.
>
> How a non-subscriber can follow discussion?
> How he
On tisdagen den 28 april 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:04:05PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Many of the more popular MUAs on your list have this command already,
>
> Can you name any others apart from mutt that come with this by default?
Kmail is one.
--
Magnus Holmgren
Ben Finney writes:
>> You're arguing that a Reply-To header is "harmful" (not that I am
>> convinced)
>
> That field is very useful. What's harmful is mailing-list software
> munging that field, which is for the author to set and for nothing else
> to fiddle with.
Yup. Reply-To is for the _orig
I demand that Noah Slater may or may not have written...
[snip; in reply to Brett Parker]
> Considering that we're discussing on a mailing list, it's reasonable to
> assume that the common case is replying to the list. Why optimise for, what
> is surely by definition, the uncommon case?
Why *brea
+ Andrei Popescu (Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:56:29 +0300):
> On Wed,29.Apr.09, 14:27:45, Darren Salt wrote:
> > The list management software, OTOH, can [add] a Mail-Followup-To
> > header, if one is not already present, containing the list address
> > and, if the sender is not subscribed, his address.
>
On Wed,29.Apr.09, 14:27:45, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Ben Finney may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
> > If someone writes a message to a list, but doesn't arrange to read messages
> > from that list, I don't think we can expect software to automatically
> > figure out that they wou
I demand that Ben Finney may or may not have written...
[snip]
> If someone writes a message to a list, but doesn't arrange to read messages
> from that list, I don't think we can expect software to automatically
> figure out that they would nevertheless like to receive those messages.
We certain
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:11:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Personally, I'm fine with giving up on the no-cc policy. Just about
> every other technical mailing list that I read tends to accumulate cc's
> until someone gets around to removing them, and mostly people just deal
> with a bit of gr
+ Ben Finney (Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:04:05 +1000):
> Caveat: I tried it and dropped it because its support for Unicode is
> currently broken (Bug#520374), and Ruby isn't a language I'm able to
> hack.
#477366, really.
--
- Are you sure we're good?
- Always.
-- Rory and Lorelai
--
To UNS
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > If someone writes a message to a list, but doesn't arrange to read
> > messages from that list, I don't think we can expect software to
> > automatically figure out that they would nevertheless like to
> > receive those messages.
>
[…]
> Bu
Ben Finney wrote:
Frank Lin PIAT writes:
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
Le mardi 28 avril 2009 à 22:36 -0500, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
> Let's see ... another series of MUA-related standards documents, RFC
> 2045 and following (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions), was
> published in November 1996, close to 2 years before the one we're
> talking about. Maybe it's j
Frank Lin PIAT writes:
> 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.
T
On 2009-04-29 07:46 (+0200), Adeodato Simó wrote:
> + Frank Lin PIAT (Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:54:07 +0200):
>> If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list:
>> If the sender of the previous mail was NOT subscribed to the list.
> And how does one (or their MUA) know which of these is
On Wed,29.Apr.09, 10:22:50, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 09:19:04AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > How Mutt is able to detect all mailing lists? The fields in the headers
> > only allow to detect the current mailing list.
>
> You can define what are mailing lists using the "lists"
Frank Lin PIAT writes:
> 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 gu
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 09:20 +1000, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:54:07PM +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> > If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list:
> > If I select "Reply":
> > To=mailing-list
> > CC=
>
> What if you are replying to a response to some
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:12 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Frank Lin PIAT 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
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 07:46 +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> + Frank Lin PIAT (Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:54:07 +0200):
>
> > If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list:
> [...]
>
> > If the sender of the previous mail was NOT subscribed to the list.
> [...]
>
> And how does one (or the
+ Frank Lin PIAT (Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:54:07 +0200):
> If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list:
[...]
> If the sender of the previous mail was NOT subscribed to the list.
[...]
And how does one (or their MUA) know which of these is the case?
--
- Are you sure we're good?
-
[Noah Slater]
> Mandating something which relies on the wholesale upgrade of hundreds
> of MUAs to get right by default doesn't sound like a good solution to
> me. I don't care how many RFCs you wave in my face. :)
Let's see ... another series of MUA-related standards documents, RFC
2045 and foll
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 09:19:04AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> How Mutt is able to detect all mailing lists? The fields in the headers
> only allow to detect the current mailing list.
You can define what are mailing lists using the "lists" and "subcribe"
config options.
--
Brian May
--
To
Noah Slater writes:
> Hmm, [‘sup-mail’] looks very interesting! Thanks for tip Ben.
You're welcome.
Caveat: I tried it and dropped it because its support for Unicode is
currently broken (Bug#520374), and Ruby isn't a language I'm able to
hack.
--
\ “He who allows oppression, shares the
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 02:34:11PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> personally I've more difficulty on handling usenet post on different
> computer: synchronize read post at home, office and offline laptop.
Unfortunately, this has also put me off NNTP. I think this is a
limitation in the clien
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:54:07PM +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> If the sender of the previous email is subscribed to the list:
> If I select "Reply":
> To=mailing-list
> CC=
What if you are replying to a response to somebody who is not
subscribed to the list?
The emailer you are respo
Frank Lin PIAT 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
Hello,
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 12:07 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Bjørn Mork writes:
>
> > I don't know, but there are plenty of reasons to choose from. See e.g.
> > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
> A stronger, and simpler, case is made by
> http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 03:13:41PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:52:36PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:12:22PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > Folders aren't the only way to manage lots of messages sanely; ask any
> > > Google Mail user.
> > >
> > >
Mike Hommey a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:12:22PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Brett Parker writes:
>>
>>> On 27 Apr 18:55, Noah Slater wrote:
Unfortunately, I don't use folders so I don't think this will work
for me.
>>> *boggle* - you claim to be on multiple lists and yet you d
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:52:36PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:12:22PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Folders aren't the only way to manage lots of messages sanely; ask any
> > Google Mail user.
> >
> > Since I wouldn't dream of recommending anyone use a proprietary data
>
+ Mike Hommey (Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:52:36 +0200):
> > Since I wouldn't dream of recommending anyone use a proprietary data
> > silo like Google Mail, I invite you instead to look at the ‘sup’ package
> > for a folder-less approach to organising email messages that many say is
> > superior.
> Descr
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:12:22PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Brett Parker writes:
>
> > On 27 Apr 18:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, I don't use folders so I don't think this will work
> > > for me.
> >
> > *boggle* - you claim to be on multiple lists and yet you don't use
> > serve
On 2009-04-28, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:25:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery
> wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> > Considering that most mailing list software has an elimnatecc feature,
>> > this is never really a problem for people who don't want that sort of
>> > behavior.
>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:25:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>
> > Considering that most mailing list software has an elimnatecc feature,
> > this is never really a problem for people who don't want that sort of
> > behavior.
>
> This "feature" is hideously broken fo
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Considering that most mailing list software has an elimnatecc feature,
> this is never really a problem for people who don't want that sort of
> behavior.
This "feature" is hideously broken for people (like myself) who split
list mail into separate folders, since it su
I demand that Ben Finney may or may not have written...
[snip; M-F-T]
> RFC2822 (which define the semantics of ‘From’ and ‘Reply-To’) and
> RFC2369 (which defines the semantics of ‘List-Post’) are
> IETF-recommended standards; the other never achieved that.
Given that it's seen some use and been
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:04:50AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Anyway, the first rule of internet:
"be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others",
so people should accept wrong CC:s without crying, and people should follow
the CoC when sendi
Le mardi 28 avril 2009 à 14:12 +0200, Bjørn Mork a écrit :
> What's "the free software world"? Is that a separate networking domain,
> or is it connected to the Internet?
CALL THE METAPHOR POLICE!
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `' “I recommend you to learn English in hope that you
Josselin Mouette writes:
> I’m not subscribed to any list which set the Reply-To header. Could you
> at least show some examples of such lists in the free software world?
What's "the free software world"? Is that a separate networking domain,
or is it connected to the Internet?
Anyway, here ar
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:04:50AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
>
> Anyway, the first rule of internet:
> "be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others",
> so people should accept wrong CC:s without crying, and people should follow
> the CoC when sending mails.
T
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 09:56:59AM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Another problem on the flip side is that many people don't observe the "please
> cc me" requests on Debian mailing lists, and that way communication gets
> annoying. So in practical terms, it is safer to add more recipients to the
On 090428 10:18, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Reply-to-list works with most of the major mailing list software.
>
> I’m not subscribed to any list which set the Reply-To header. Could you
> at least show some examples of such lists in the free software world?
>
Skåne Sjælland Linux User Group (SSLU
2009/4/28 Josselin Mouette :
> I’m not subscribed to any list which set the Reply-To header. Could you
> at least show some examples of such lists in the free software world?
Just a few (all of them form Argentina):
miembros-at-usla.org.ar; anillo-lst-at-linux.org.ar,
lug-org-at-lugmen.org.ar, *-at
Brett Parker writes:
> On 27 Apr 18:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I don't use folders so I don't think this will work
> > for me.
>
> *boggle* - you claim to be on multiple lists and yet you don't use
> server side filtering and folders?! OK - now that's just plain odd.
Folders aren
On 27 Apr 18:49, Noah Slater wrote:
> > So, user error, not software error...
>
> This illustrates my point perfectly!
>
> It's not user error, because I'm just doing what I've learnt to do.
Erm - how's that not user error? What you've learnt is obviously wrong. Relearn
how to use your MUA effi
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:46:01AM +0100, Brett Parker wrote:
> *boggle* - you claim to be on multiple lists and yet you don't use server side
> filtering and folders?! OK - now that's just plain odd.
Neither do I, does that make me odd too? By all means comment on how I
or anyone elses uses lists
On 28 Apr 03:58, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> Ben Finney a écrit :
> > Noah Slater writes:
> >
> >> Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
> >> is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
> >> lists, which as you can see, doesn't happen ve
On 27 Apr 18:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:48:50PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > I fully agree with this. I think having to remember which key one must
> > use in each context for "r"eply is lame. This is why I do in my ~/.muttrc:
> [...]
> > Where l/debian is the folder whi
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:16:08PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le lundi 27 avril 2009 à 14:44 +0200, Michael Tautschnig a écrit :
If you're annoyed by cc:s (well, Holger, I know you are, you told me about that
more than once :-) ), configure your mailclient to set Mail-
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> If this is such a concern, I would like to see the Code of Conduct
> updates to recommend that people concerned with follow up emails set
> the appropriate headers in their own clients. This was detailed
> earlier in this thread.
If people want followups,
Le mardi 28 avril 2009 à 10:11 +1000, Brian May a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:16:08PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > C. Only supported by a handful of clients
>
> A number of clients won't automatically generate the header, but may
> still support it for group replies. I think th
Le mardi 28 avril 2009 à 02:56 +0100, Noah Slater a écrit :
> It's all very well having a feature like this, but if that feature is easy to
> forget because Debian's lists are the only ones that want me use it, it's
> hardly
> of any real value. Add a Reply-To and this problem goes away.
Reply-to
+ Mike Hommey (Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:46:35 +0200):
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:53:12AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Noah Slater writes:
> > > Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
> > > is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
> > > lists
William Pitcock writes:
> On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 14:05 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > As it sadly happens many times every day. And as long as there are
> > no means to enforce it (either pure social or aided by technology),
> > it will continue to happen.
>
> Reply-To: debian-devel@lists.debian
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du mardi 28 avril 2009, vers 05:27,
Brian May disait :
>> I tried hard, for many years, to love the Mail-Followup-To field, but I
>> must agree that it doesn't serve the purpose well enough to recommend.
>> (Briefly: it breaks when a discussion crosses between
On Tuesday 28 April 2009 05:11:26 Russ Allbery wrote:
> Noah Slater writes:
> > As far as I see it:
> >
> > * Debian has dropped the Reply-To header because it is "harmful" in
> > some way.
> >
> > * Debian has mandated that all replies must behave as if Reply-To
> > existed.
>
> If this w
On Tue,28.Apr.09, 03:09:52, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Many of the more popular MUAs on your list have this command
>
> Can you name any others apart from mutt that come with this by default?
Reply in Claws-Mail (and Sylpheed) does the right thing by default
(Reply-to-List if it detects a list, Re
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 14:05 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Montag, 27. April 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > Interestingly you did it again, ignoring the list Code of Conduct.
>
> As it sadly happens many times every day. And as long as there are no means
> to
> enforce it (either pure
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:53:12AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Noah Slater writes:
>
> > Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
> > is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
> > lists, which as you can see, doesn't happen very often.
>
> No
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:59:53PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> The appropriate fields *are* set: the mailing list sets the RFC 2369
> fields for replies to the list, and the author sets the From and
> (optionally) the Reply-To fields for replies to the sender.
The appropriate fields are set, I neve
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:54:56PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Well, “like you have been doing” means *not* using it, even in this
> thread, so I find the above rather difficult to believe — especially
> because “I forgot” is even less plausible in the context of this
> thread where you've been expl
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:10:14PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> I tried hard, for many years, to love the Mail-Followup-To field, but I
> must agree that it doesn't serve the purpose well enough to recommend.
> (Briefly: it breaks when a discussion crosses between different mailing
> lists, and other
Noah Slater writes:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:35:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/I-D/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt
> >
> > Perfectly well defined.
>
> An interesting riposte for those arguing the opposite IETF angle.
Interesting in that
Ben Finney writes:
> Is this so hard, people? We have large brains evolved in part
> precisely for the purpose of figuring out the protocols of
> communication and applying them moment to moment. If you don't want to
> decide in a given instance whether you want to respond publicly or
> privately
Noah Slater writes:
> If this is such a concern, I would like to see the Code of Conduct
> updates to recommend that people concerned with follow up emails set
> the appropriate headers in their own clients. This was detailed
> earlier in this thread.
The appropriate fields *are* set: the mailin
Noah Slater writes:
> I am not saying anything like "I will not obey the Code of Conduct
> because it is stupid" but rather something like "I will try my best,
> like I have been doing, but I know I will continue to fail."
Well, “like you have been doing” means *not* using it, even in this
threa
Brian May writes:
> IIRC Thunderbird use to have a reply to list command, but I can't find
> it anymore :-(.
The bug has been open since 2000, and has recently seen activity again
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45715>.
Meanwhile Debian's Thunderbird is apparently patched already t
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:35:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/I-D/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt
>
> Perfectly well defined.
An interesting riposte for those arguing the opposite IETF angle.
If adherence to standards is so important, surely it's
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:16:08PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 27 avril 2009 à 14:44 +0200, Michael Tautschnig a écrit :
> > If you're annoyed by cc:s (well, Holger, I know you are, you told me about
> > that
> > more than once :-) ), configure your mailclient to set Mail-Followup-To
Ben Finney a écrit :
> Noah Slater writes:
>
>> Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
>> is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
>> lists, which as you can see, doesn't happen very often.
>
> No, the point of a ‘reply to list’ command i
Bjørn Mork writes:
> I don't know, but there are plenty of reasons to choose from. See e.g.
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
A stronger, and simpler, case is made by
http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful/> which
notes that the newer IETF standards make it much c
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 03:09 +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:04:05PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Those MUAs already *do* the right thing when a user presses “reply to
> > author” (sometimes just called “reply”): they reply to the author or,
> > if the author sets a ‘Reply-To’
Noah Slater writes:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:04:05PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Many of the more popular MUAs on your list have this command already,
> Can you name any others apart from mutt that come with this by default?
Gnus has a version of it. It doesn't work quite the way that mutt
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le lundi 27 avril 2009 à 14:44 +0200, Michael Tautschnig a écrit :
> > If you're annoyed by cc:s (well, Holger, I know you are, you told me
> > about that more than once :-) ), configure your mailclient to set
> > Mail-Followup-To
>
> Mail-Followup-To is:
> A. Use
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:11:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The primary problem with setting Reply-To is that it makes private
> replies extremely difficult (in clients that honor the RFC-defined
> meaning of the header field, at least) and significantly increases the
> chances that private rep
Noah Slater writes:
> As far as I see it:
>
> * Debian has dropped the Reply-To header because it is "harmful" in
> some way.
>
> * Debian has mandated that all replies must behave as if Reply-To existed.
If this were the case, this would be an easy solution. However, it's
not. Debian
Noah Slater writes:
> You're arguing that a Reply-To header is "harmful" (not that I am
> convinced)
That field is very useful. What's harmful is mailing-list software
munging that field, which is for the author to set and for nothing else
to fiddle with.
--
\ “Saying that Java is nice b
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:04:05PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Those MUAs already *do* the right thing when a user presses “reply to
> author” (sometimes just called “reply”): they reply to the author or,
> if the author sets a ‘Reply-To’ field, to the author's chosen reply
> address from that field
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:53:12AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> No, the point of a ‘reply to list’ command is you *don't* have to
> remember when to use it. Just use it every time you reply to any list,
> and it will DTRT because it uses the standard fields which are in just
> about every mailing lis
Frank Lin PIAT writes:
> This thread will come over again and again until:
[…]
> 4. The following MUA are fixed to behave "properly" when a user
>press "reply":
Those MUAs already *do* the right thing when a user presses “reply to
author” (sometimes just called “reply”): they reply to the a
Holger Levsen writes:
> Dear lazylist,
>
> On Montag, 27. April 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> > * The Debian lists do not have a Reply-To header,
>
> does someone know why?
In brief: because that field is for the *sender* to set, if they want;
and the mailing list software has no business touc
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:34:49AM +0930, Karl Goetz wrote:
> /me had to use 'L' on Debians default MUA for the reply-to-list.
It's all very well having a feature like this, but if that feature is easy to
forget because Debian's lists are the only ones that want me use it, it's hardly
of any real
Noah Slater writes:
> Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
> is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
> lists, which as you can see, doesn't happen very often.
No, the point of a ‘reply to list’ command is you *don't* have to
remember w
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:23:33 +0200
Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 14:48 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Dne Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:39:15 +0100
> > Noah Slater napsal(a):
> > > * The Debian lists do not have a Reply-To header, meaning that
> > > by default my email clien
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:16:08PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> C. Only supported by a handful of clients
A number of clients won't automatically generate the header, but may
still support it for group replies. I think this might include Evolution
and Thunderbid (although it was a while s
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 14:48 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
> Hi
>
> Dne Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:39:15 +0100
> Noah Slater napsal(a):
>
> > * The Debian lists are the only lists I have ever come across that
> > mandate, or
> > even care, about such a thing. I have been on many lists in my time,
>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:48:50PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> I fully agree with this. I think having to remember which key one must
> use in each context for "r"eply is lame. This is why I do in my ~/.muttrc:
[...]
> Where l/debian is the folder which contains Debian lists, and it allows
> to a
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:09:19PM +0100, Brett Parker wrote:
> On 27 Apr 15:41, Noah Slater wrote:
> > You're arguing that a Reply-To header is "harmful" (not that I am
> > convinced) and
>
> Think of the occasions when you actually do want to do an offlist reply - it's
> not that uncommon - havi
+ Noah Slater (Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:10:17 +0100):
> Yes, I know the L command, but thanks for pointing it out! My argument
> is that I have to remember to use when I am replying to the Debian
> lists
I fully agree with this. I think having to remember which key one must
use in each context for "r"
On 27 Apr 15:41, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:19:08PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > Noah Slater wrote:
> > > Either you avoid Reply-To because it is "harmful" and accept that you
> > > will get
> > > carbon copies from the commonly implemented group reply function of
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Mail-Followup-To is:
> A. Useless junk without clear semantics
> B. Violating standards
Which standards would that be?
Bjørn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@li
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 04:19:08PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Noah Slater wrote:
> > Either you avoid Reply-To because it is "harmful" and accept that you will
> > get
> > carbon copies from the commonly implemented group reply function of modern
> > mail
> > clients, or you include t
Noah Slater wrote:
> Either you avoid Reply-To because it is "harmful" and accept that you will get
> carbon copies from the commonly implemented group reply function of modern
> mail
> clients, or you include the "harmful" Reply-To header and avoid it.
>
> What am I missing? This seems too obvio
Le lundi 27 avril 2009 à 14:44 +0200, Michael Tautschnig a écrit :
> If you're annoyed by cc:s (well, Holger, I know you are, you told me about
> that
> more than once :-) ), configure your mailclient to set Mail-Followup-To and
> hope
> for the next poster's mailclient to support that header. Wh
Hi
Dne Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:33:06 +
Clint Adams napsal(a):
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:48:36PM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
> > Definitely not the only one which mandates this.
>
> Please list others so I can mock them.
For example Mutt lists I mentioned. I saw the same rule in Frugalware
an
Noah Slater writes:
> * I don't know much about mailing list software, so I'm not going to be as
> bold as to suggest I know what the solution is. However, on all the other
> lists, I never get duplicate copies of email when people reply to me with
> an
> unnecessary CC. Perhaps th
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:48:36PM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
> Definitely not the only one which mandates this.
Please list others so I can mock them.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:06:01PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 03:03:10PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Montag, 27. April 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > * The Debian lists do not have a Reply-To header,
>
> > does someone know why?
>
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/re
Holger Levsen writes:
> On Montag, 27. April 2009, Noah Slater wrote:
>> * The Debian lists do not have a Reply-To header,
>
> does someone know why?
I don't know, but there are plenty of reasons to choose from. See e.g.
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Those not wanting redund
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:48:36PM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
> > * The Debian lists are the only lists I have ever come across that
> > mandate, or
> > even care, about such a thing. I have been on many lists in my time,
> > and my
> > current list of mailing list subscriptions stands
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
