On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:06 PM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> I know of IMAP, but it's not free when having a GMX account. I'm using it at
> work.
> Please, don't tell me google mail has IMAP for free - I don't want to give
> away my
> privacy to google.
>
My Opera Mail [1] has IMAP, too. :) They adop
Vincent van Ravesteijn writes:
>> Me? I'm using a mail client with builtin POP3 account access.
>> I cannot see how procmail can improve my situation regarding multiple copies.
>
| Lars suggested to use some advanced client (procmail ?) to do the filtering.
I only do duplicate msgid handling wit
Peter Kümmel writes:
| On 21.11.2011 23:11, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>>> I use thunderbird, and all I know now is that I have to somehow install
>> locally
>>> a duplicate filter.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I use thunderbird as well.
>>
>> And I didn't install any filter.
>>
>> Maybe its the mailserver.
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 21.11.2011 um 09:54 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>
>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>
>> | Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>>>
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
>
>> On 08/11/2011 22:10, Pete
Am 22.11.2011 um 22:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> On 22/11/2011 07:39, Stephan Witt wrote:
>> Am 21.11.2011 um 23:34 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:
>>
>>> Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" het volgende:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> No, because you're forcing your will on
On 21/11/2011 22:42, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 21.11.2011 11:46, Stephan Witt wrote:
I use thunderbird, and all I know now is that I have to somehow
install locally
a duplicate filter.
I guess the problem comes from gmx.net, same as Stephan actually...
Abdel.
On 22/11/2011 07:39, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 21.11.2011 um 23:34 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:
Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" het volgende:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
No, because you're forcing your will onto others.
While you are giving me the great opportunity to read you
On 21/11/2011 23:16, Pavel Sanda wrote:
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
a
On 21/11/2011 22:36, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 21.11.2011 08:51, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Actaully I would argue that he, and you. are the ones doing it wrong.
Wrong? Why?
I understand that it's not wise to force everybody to reply-to list.
But if I decide to get the reply only once and g
Op 22-11-2011 7:39, Stephan Witt schreef:
Am 21.11.2011 um 23:34 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:
Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" het volgende:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
No, because you're forcing your will onto others.
While you are giving me the great opportunity to read yo
Am 21.11.2011 um 23:34 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:
>
> Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" het volgende:
> >
> > Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> > > No, because you're forcing your will onto others.
While you are giving me the great opportunity to read your mails twice :)
Especially
Raymond Lillard wrote:
> Would you rather let someone find them all by themselves
> and in the process waste a lot of their time on something
> that is not a usage error on their part?
>
> Bugs need to be tracked and published.
fortunately the server is so slow that most complaining users disappea
On 11/21/2011 03:13 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
i actually like your preference of git community model and we shall kill
our
bug tracker as soon as possible, it just sucks :)
pavel
Yes, good idea. Our software only looks bad if you tell someone there are
over 1000 bugs in it. It become
> i actually like your preference of git community model and we shall kill
our
> bug tracker as soon as possible, it just sucks :)
>
> pavel
Yes, good idea. Our software only looks bad if you tell someone there are
over 1000 bugs in it. It becomes even worse if you tell him that noone
cares about
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> 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?
of course not. but its very easy to distinguish newbie or once-a-year
appearing dev and reply appropriately.
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> 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
Op 21 nov. 2011 23:17 schreef "Pavel Sanda" 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 sim
On 21.11.2011 23:11, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
I use thunderbird, and all I know now is that I have to somehow install
locally
a duplicate filter.
I use thunderbird as well.
And I didn't install any filter.
And I tought I missed something.
My current workflow is:
- click reply
-
On 21.11.2011 23:11, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
I use thunderbird, and all I know now is that I have to somehow install
locally
a duplicate filter.
I use thunderbird as well.
And I didn't install any filter.
Maybe its the mailserver. I use gmail (lyx.org) and previously the email of
wo
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
> I use thunderbird, and all I know now is that I have to somehow install
locally
> a duplicate filter.
>
>
I use thunderbird as well.
And I didn't install any filter.
Maybe its the mailserver. I use gmail (lyx.org) and previously the email of
work. Never saw any duplication?
Maybe you can try
On 21.11.2011 11:46, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 21.11.2011 um 09:54 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On
On 21.11.2011 08:28, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümm
On 21.11.2011 08:51, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Actaully I would argue that he, and you. are the ones doing it wrong.
Wrong? Why?
I understand that it's not wise to force everybody to reply-to list.
But if I decide to get the reply only once and get it from the list...
what's wrong with s
Am 21.11.2011 um 09:54 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Stephan Witt writes:
>
> | Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>>
>>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>>
>>> | Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> On 08.11.201
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>
>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>
>> | Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
>>>
On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
> On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Op 8-11-2011 22:03, P
Actaully I would argue that he, and you. are the ones doing it wrong.
Wrong? Why?
I understand that it's not wise to force everybody to reply-to list.
But if I decide to get the reply only once and get it from the list...
what's wrong with sending my 2cent emails to list and set the reply-to
Am 20.11.2011 um 23:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Stephan Witt writes:
>
> | Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
>>
>>> On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
>> On 08
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
>
>> On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>>> On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
> On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Op 8-11-2011
Peter Kümmel writes:
| On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
>>> On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
> Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
>>>
On 10.11.2011 20:35, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 09.11.2011 11:41, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
I don't understand what the problem is of "reply all".
I got your email twice, that's the problem.
You can do something about it yourself.
I don't understand. How could I prevent you to send me a
On 09.11.2011 11:41, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
I don't understand what the problem is of "reply all".
I got your email twice, that's the problem.
You can do something about it yourself.
I don't understand. How could I prevent you to send me a private email?
Read this again:
To pre
Op 9-11-2011 9:20, Peter Kuemmel schreef:
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 23:04:43 +0100
Von: Pavel Sanda
An: lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
Betreff: Re: \'Reply\' sends to list.
Peter Kümmel wrote:
You can do something about it yourself.
I don't understa
I don't understand what the problem is of "reply all".
I got your email twice, that's the problem.
You can do something about it yourself.
I don't understand. How could I prevent you to send me a private email?
Read this again:
To prevent duplication you either send to the list from the
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 23:04:43 +0100
> Von: Pavel Sanda
> An: lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
> Betreff: Re: \'Reply\' sends to list.
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
> >> You can do something about it yourself.
> >
> > I don
On 11/08/2011 11:29 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
and btw its worth to check your email client documentation. it might have
function for reply-to-list, which just picks-up the correct To: for the mailing
list you read without manual editing addresses
+
Peter, I'd also consider using news server that
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:04:43PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
> >> You can do something about it yourself.
> >
> > I don't understand. How could I prevent you to send me a private email?
>
> i lost my battle for this long time ago :)
> functional solution is to set in header o
Stephan Witt wrote:
> I have to edit most of the to addresses of my replies and my reply to field
> too.
and btw its worth to check your email client documentation. it might have
function for reply-to-list, which just picks-up the correct To: for the mailing
list you read without manual editing a
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> in mutt just use: folder-hook lyx-mail-folder my_hdr Reply-To:
> your_addr...@lyx.org
errr... folder-hook lyx-mail-folder my_hdr Reply-To: lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
p
Stephan Witt wrote:
> I have to edit most of the to addresses of my replies and my reply to field
> too.
> AFAICS, only Pavel is one of the rare people sending mails with the "correct"
> reply to.
unfortunately no. not correct, its highly unusual to rewrite reply-to. but
since i was not able to
Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> You can do something about it yourself.
>
> I don't understand. How could I prevent you to send me a private email?
i lost my battle for this long time ago :)
functional solution is to set in header of outgoing messages: Reply-To:
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
its not correct, a
Am 08.11.2011 um 22:40 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>>> Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
>
On 08/11/2011 22:10, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
On 08.11.2011 22:07, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply
Op 8-11-2011 22:03, Peter Kümmel schreef:
On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply all" which only
produces unneeded duplicates.
Pete
On 08.11.2011 21:59, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply all" which only
produces unneeded duplicates.
Peter
I don't understand what the problem is
Op 8-11-2011 21:48, Peter Kümmel schreef:
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply all" which only
produces unneeded duplicates.
Peter
I don't understand what the problem is of "reply all".
To prevent duplication you either s
Send it again, just demonstrate all subscribers how 'useful' these duplicates
are.
--
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply all" which only
produces unneeded duplicates.
Peter
Is it still necessary to disable the reply function for this list?
Most people are now used to press "reply all" which only
produces unneeded duplicates.
Peter
49 matches
Mail list logo
