Nicolas George (12024-12-05):
> I grant you that the case of announces mailing-lists is not properly
> covered by the “always reply to all and let reply-to take care of it”
> method. There is no way to write in the mail “if the user tries to
> reply to all, strongly suggest
o you that this person is a crook /
that your system clock is badly set / …”, you know you are doing
something unusual, you even think it is necessary to call the
recipient's attention on it, and at the same time you fix the recipient
lists.
I grant you that the case of announces mailing-lists
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 09:49:29PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> googly.negotiator...@aceecat.org (12024-12-05):
> > Gmail definitely lets you select between Reply and Reply All, and it
> > respects Reply-To as far as I can tell.
>
> Google's webmail respects reply-to but lets users override it.
googly.negotiator...@aceecat.org (12024-12-05):
> Gmail definitely lets you select between Reply and Reply All, and it
> respects Reply-To as far as I can tell.
Google's webmail respects reply-to but lets users override it. As it
should.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 12:43:12PM -0500, Kurt Hackenberg wrote:
> On 2024/12/05 01:08, Rene Kita wrote:
>
> > I wonder if the argument that modern MUAs make it easy to choose between
> > 'reply' and 'group reply'/'reply all' still holds.
>
> The List-*: headers probably didn't exist 25 years ago
times, then the error rate drops to 1%.
Based on my experience, with a significant portion of mail coming from
mailing-lists with reply-to set, I estimate that “always reply to all”
is right better than 90% of the times. A standard written taking human
fallibleness in account could have achieved at
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 12:43:12PM -0500, Kurt Hackenberg wrote:
> I guess what matters is what mass-market mail readers do. I guess
> they would be Microsoft Outlook, Apple Mail (Mac), the iPhone mail
> reader, and the Android app named "Gmail". What do they do?
Gmail definitely lets you select
On 2024/12/05 01:08, Rene Kita wrote:
I wonder if the argument that modern MUAs make it easy to choose between
'reply' and 'group reply'/'reply all' still holds.
Thunderbird makes it easy. It also has a third command, "reply list". (I
suppose it recog
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 07:08:45AM +0100, Rene Kita wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 08:59:18PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 09:05:19AM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> [...]
> > > Adding “Reply-To: $address_of_the_list” is a more reliable way of doing
> > > it. Most mailing
gt; > chosen to do it myself for those that do not.
>
> The war is probably long over, and you're probably right that it's the
> least annoying thing, especially for non-technical lists, but seeing
> this brought me back to the days when I actually used mailing lists
>
are I know do it by default, and I have
> chosen to do it myself for those that do not.
The war is probably long over, and you're probably right that it's the
least annoying thing, especially for non-technical lists, but seeing
this brought me back to the days when I actually used
Sirius via Mutt-users (12024-11-26):
> You can tell people "do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list", and hope
> that they follow the advise.
Adding “Reply-To: $address_of_the_list” is a more reliable way of doing
it. Most mailing-list software I know do it by default, and I have
chosen to do it
uot; or "lists" commands.
> #
> # This field has two purposes. First, preventing you from re‐
> # ceiving duplicate copies of replies to messages which you send
> # to mailing lists, and second, ensuring that you do get a reply
> # separately for any messages sent to known lists
list,
# specified with the "subscribe" or "lists" commands.
#
# This field has two purposes. First, preventing you from re‐
# ceiving duplicate copies of replies to messages which you send
# to mailing lists, and second, ensuring that you do get a reply
# separately for any m
s mutt to add “Reply-To: mutt-users@mutt.org” when writing to
> > mutt-users, and will tell people who reply to reply to the list
> > rather than you.
> >
> > Most mailing-list do that for you, this one, along with the Debian
> > ones, is one of the few I know that do not, expecti
On 271024, 11:06, John Hawkinson wrote:
> I just want to point out a few things:
>
> . What is described as "two copies" is really two different messages that
> contain some different information.
> . Sometimes those differences are important to keep track of.
> . When a mailing list delays deliv
Marcus C. Gottwald (12024-10-27):
> Mutt offers the pattern "~=" that matches on "duplicated
> messages". You might be able to achieve the desired behaviour
> by limiting the index display to "!~=".
Note that limiting the display in mutt's listing will not help with the
time wasted by checking the
Sadeep Madurange wrote (Sun 2024-Oct-27 10:38:01 +0800):
> In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
> email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
>
> Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
Mutt offers the pattern "~=" that matche
of the few I know that do not, expecting users to adhere to the
> failed “List-Reply-To” standard instead.
No, this is not a fair statement ("Most").
There is an immense variety in how mailing lists on the Internet work, and it's
almost impossible to make accurate statements abo
Sadeep Madurange (12024-10-27):
> In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
> email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
>
> Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
Hi.
You can add this to your config file:
send-hook ~cmutt-us...@m
On 27.10.24 10:38, Sadeep Madurange wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
> email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
>
> Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
If you use procmail to sort incoming mail
On 2024-10-27 10:38, Sadeep Madurange wrote:
> In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
> email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
>
> Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
Not sure if it's as automatic as you'd like, but Mutt c
On 271024, 10:38, Sadeep Madurange wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
> email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
>
> Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
>
> --
> Sadeep Madurange
> PGP: 103BF9E3E750
Hello,
In some lists, users send replies to the list address while cc-ing my
email address. So, I get two copies of the same email.
Is there anything I can do so that I only receive/see one copy?
--
Sadeep Madurange
PGP: 103BF9E3E750BF7E
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 03:32:54PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I think L[ist reply] depends on there being a List-Id header in the
list's messages to work if the list isn't in lists/subscribe.
Most of the lists I use do have List-Id headers but not (quite) all.
Yes, you're right. The worst offen
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 09:30:38AM -0500, José María Mateos wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:50:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
> > into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe&#x
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 01:04:15PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote:
> 12021/01/05 03:27.03 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Chris Green ಬರೆದರು:
>> Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
>> into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe', is this
>>
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:50:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe', is this
correct/OK?
I never added any mailing list I'm subscribed to, and everyt
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 01:04:15PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote:
> 12021/01/05 03:27.03 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Chris Green ಬರೆದರು:
> >
> > Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
> > into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe', is
12021/01/05 03:27.03 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Chris Green ಬರೆದರು:
>
> Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
> into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe', is this
> correct/OK?
>
> I've never been quite clear why there
Currently I automatically add all mailing lists I am subscribed to
into my muttrc file against both 'lists' and 'subscribe', is this
correct/OK?
I've never been quite clear why there are two commands.
I have in my muttrc :-
#
#
# Mailing lists
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020, Remco Rnders wrote:
> > save-hook "~C ietf-\\([a-z0-9]+\\)@ietf.org" =%1
> I know it is not a direct answer to your question, but it might perhaps get
> the
> end result you want; Have you considered using procmail or a sieve filter to
> automatically save mail matching you
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 08:08:07AM +0200, Claus wrote in
<20201011060807.ga46...@kiel.esmtp.org>:
I'm trying to use a more generic approach for some patterns
to handle mailing list, e.g., something like:
save-hook "~C ietf-\\([a-z0-9]+\\)@ietf.org" =%1
instead of having one entry for each maili
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 08:08:07AM +0200, Claus Assmann wrote:
I'm trying to use a more generic approach for some patterns
to handle mailing list, e.g., something like:
save-hook "~C ietf-\\([a-z0-9]+\\)@ietf.org" =%1
instead of having one entry for each mailing list.
Is that possible with the
I'm trying to use a more generic approach for some patterns
to handle mailing list, e.g., something like:
save-hook "~C ietf-\\([a-z0-9]+\\)@ietf.org" =%1
instead of having one entry for each mailing list.
Is that possible with the current mutt features?
It seems that back-references in regular
Hello,
Go to www.mutt.org, scroll down, click on "Mailing Lists". Then click
on either of two links to mailing list archives. Observe that the links
are broken. If memory serves, they've been this way for quite a while.
I hope whoever is in charge will replace them with working links.
-Jack
* Alexander Dahl [03-11-13 04:37]:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 03:32:53PM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > set reverse_name
> > set from = "p...@lespocky.de"
> > set use_from
> > alternates " "
> >
> > send-hook . unmy_hdr From:
> > send-hook "my_hdr From: "
> >
> >
> > Now when you reply
Hola,
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 03:32:53PM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> set reverse_name
> set from = "p...@lespocky.de"
> set use_from
> alternates " "
>
> send-hook . unmy_hdr From:
> send-hook "my_hdr From: "
>
>
> Now when you reply, mutt will use the name in the To: field to determ
ok . ..." matches everything so the
> > second send-hook will not be matched unless it is triggered by the
> > conditions specified, and *only* for the instances where it matches. The
> > default, "send-hook . ...", will be triggered on the next pass thru the
> &
conditions specified, and *only* for the instances where it matches. The
> default, "send-hook . ...", will be triggered on the next pass thru the
> config file.
This would work for those mailing lists, but there's another problem.
After defining my send-hooks in a file I in
On 20Feb2013 10:01, David Champion wrote:
| In mutt, I always group-reply. If you don't like the copy, you can
| filter it. If someone else wants the copy, they can't fabricate it, so
| I make sure they get it. And if you provide MFT, it's honored.
Me too. If someone explicitly says "please do
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 05:27:50PM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
Hi,
In mutt you can delete an entire thread, without reading it, by pressing
Ctrl-d
It would be nice if mutt, for example with Ctrl-Shift-d, remembers
this after a mutt session and does not present any mail of this thread
anymore
Hi Florian,
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 07:44:37AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Florian Lohoff [02-20-13 04:43]:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:51:54AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> >
> > Just to make it clear - I am one of those who like to get a direct
> > reply _additionally_ to the list mail.
* On 20 Feb 2013, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> David Champion wrote:
> >
> > I haven't kept up as much lately with email RFC as I used to, but I'm
> > unaware of any standard means of *requesting* a cc (or of declaring
> > any other reply policy, besides Reply-To:).
>
> Mail-Followup-To: is fairly
Hi,
In mutt you can delete an entire thread, without reading it, by pressing
Ctrl-d
It would be nice if mutt, for example with Ctrl-Shift-d, remembers
this after a mutt session and does not present any mail of this thread
anymore. Comments about such a feature?
matthias
PS: The actual
David Champion wrote:
>
> I haven't kept up as much lately with email RFC as I used to, but I'm
> unaware of any standard means of *requesting* a cc (or of declaring
> any other reply policy, besides Reply-To:).
Mail-Followup-To: is fairly well supported, though I don't think you'll find
it in t
Incoming from David Champion:
> * On 20 Feb 2013, s. keeling wrote:
> > Patrick is correct. It should be up to you to *request* a personal
> > Cc: if you want one. The list volume here is not that big that it's
>
> I haven't kept up as much lately with email RFC as I used to, but I'm
> unaware
* On 20 Feb 2013, s. keeling wrote:
> Patrick is correct. It should be up to you to *request* a personal
> Cc: if you want one. The list volume here is not that big that it's
I haven't kept up as much lately with email RFC as I used to, but I'm
unaware of any standard means of *requesting* a cc
Incoming from Florian Lohoff:
>
> Just to make it clear - I am one of those who like to get a direct
> reply _additionally_ to the list mail.
Patrick is correct. It should be up to you to *request* a personal
Cc: if you want one. The list volume here is not that big that it's
difficult to keep
* Florian Lohoff [02-20-13 04:43]:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:51:54AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > But dumbing things down also causes problems. People should learn
> > some social graces. Email is one of the basic forms of communication
> > in our new electronic world. I think this facade do
Hola,
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:51:54AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> But dumbing things down also causes problems. People should learn
> some social graces. Email is one of the basic forms of communication
> in our new electronic world. I think this facade does them no favors.
>
> But mostly b
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 09:03:13PM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> mutt, like vi and other command line programs, have an invisible user
> interface. One needs to internalize the interface in order to use it
> efficiently. If takes lots of time to learn such an interface and to become
> product
* s. keeling :
> Incoming from Patrick Ben Koetter:
> > * s. keeling :
> > >
> > > Roger that. The mortals I know think email's old-school/obsolete.
> > > They consider it hard to use, their inboxes are full of UCE (or
> >
> > If you use http://automx.org setting up a new account is a matter of
Incoming from Patrick Ben Koetter:
> * s. keeling :
> >
> > Roger that. The mortals I know think email's old-school/obsolete.
> > They consider it hard to use, their inboxes are full of UCE (or
>
> If you use http://automx.org setting up a new account is a matter of
That looks cool, but you mis
> in our new electronic world. I think this facade does them no favors.
> >
> > This would mean to convince them willingly put time in understanding
> > mailing lists, choose a sophisticated MUA with reply to list feature
> > or check and probably change To/Cc in each an
hink this facade does them no favors.
>
> This would mean to convince them willingly put time in understanding
> mailing lists, choose a sophisticated MUA with reply to list feature
> or check and probably change To/Cc in each and every mail. Good luck
> with this. I stay with accepti
Hei hei,
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 02:44:19AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> Why? It is awkward replying to a list when a copy isn't sent to the
> subscriber of the list¹ 'L' doesn't work for a start.
>
> Catering for inexperienced or uninterested users unfortunately makes it
> awkward for normal
his would mean to convince them willingly put time in understanding
mailing lists, choose a sophisticated MUA with reply to list feature
or check and probably change To/Cc in each and every mail. Good luck
with this. I stay with accepting there are dumb people (no offense)
and am happy if they use
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:06:01PM +0530, dexter wrote:
> how can i colorize 'subject' line from different mailing lists
> in index.
Wouldn't sorting them into different mailboxes avoid the problem of
two or more lists having the same subject?
--
"If you're not ca
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 08:02:02AM +0100, Alexander Dahl wrote:
>
> This is exactly the problem: if you have unexperienced or uninterested
> users you want them to have an easy user interface. Teaching them to
> hit reply if they want to answer just to the poster and reply to all
> for answering a
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 02:00:41PM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Michael Elkins wrote:
> > I prefer to save the copy with the List-Post header field rather
> > than the personal copy, so I use a slightly different approach:
>
> Agreed. However Mailman has an option that is often (ab)used.
>
> "Fi
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:15:43AM -0500, Mark H.
Wood wrote:
> h! HTML mail is punishable by death
with this being the default
--
With best regards,
xrgtn
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
eone
> > posts to the mailing list and also either To: or Cc: your subscribed
> > address then Mailman does not mail you a mailing list copy. Argh! I
> > always uncheck that when I have control of a mailing list. But others
> > tend to check it.
>
> We set this de
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:06:01PM +0530, dexter wrote:
how can i colorize 'subject' line from different mailing lists
in index.
It is not possible to color only the subject part of the line
differently, but you can change the color of the entire line
itself with "color i
how can i colorize 'subject' line from different mailing lists
in index.
-dexter
nd someone
> posts to the mailing list and also either To: or Cc: your subscribed
> address then Mailman does not mail you a mailing list copy. Argh! I
> always uncheck that when I have control of a mailing list. But others
> tend to check it.
We set this default yes (aka avoid) on all ou
On (13/02/13 11:15), Mark H. Wood put forth the proposition:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 09:17:43PM -0500, Brandon McCaig wrote:
Some mailing lists don't require a subscription so you should use
'g' to reply to those lists so even unsubscribed participants get
the messages. Other li
Michael Elkins wrote:
> I prefer to save the copy with the List-Post header field rather
> than the personal copy, so I use a slightly different approach:
Agreed. However Mailman has an option that is often (ab)used.
"Filter out duplicate messages to list members (if possible)"
In which case
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:15:43AM -0500, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> Not for the first time, I find myself wishing for a Geek Code -like
> header to encode all the many mailing-list rules and preferences, so
> that UAs could give us more help in conforming to local standards.
Well, so why doesn't one c
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 09:17:43PM -0500, Brandon McCaig wrote:
> Some mailing lists don't require a subscription so you should use
> 'g' to reply to those lists so even unsubscribed participants get
> the messages. Other lists insist that you /don't/ reply to
> eve
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:49:01PM +1100, Erik Christiansen wrote:
presence of the List-Post header also helps mutt's 'L' command, IIRC?
(No need for "subscribe" in .muttrc)
Yes, that was actually the primary motivation for the recipe.
On 12.02.13 17:44, Michael Elkins wrote:
>
> I prefer to save the copy with the List-Post header field rather than the
> personal copy, so I use a slightly different approach:
>
> :0
> * ^TOmutt-\/[^@]+
> {
> # mail cc'd to the mutt-* lists but without the List-Post: header are
> dupes
>
Incoming from Brandon McCaig:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:32:13AM +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> >
> > Is there a command other than "g" which is appropriate when
> > replying to a group?
>
> Some mailing lists don't require a subscription so you s
"g" (for "group
> reply"), and Mutt generates the following header pair:
>
> To: David Woodfall
> Cc: mutt-users@mutt.org
>
> Is there a command other than "g" which is appropriate when
> replying to a group?
Some mailing lists don't
On 12Feb2013 11:31, David Woodfall wrote:
| My .procmailrc-lists is populated with eg:
|
| :0
| * ^.*mutt-users@mutt.org*
| lists/mutt-users@mutt.org/
|
| Which catches mail To or Cc the mailing list, so if I do get a dup it
| will end up at the same place, but now your dup catcher will detect i
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 07:33:30PM +1100, Erik Christiansen wrote:
# Collapse duplicate messages, but not my
:0 Whc: msgid.lock # posts that I've BCCed, for testing.
* !^From: Erik Christiansen
| formail -D 8192 msgid.cache
On 12.02.13 11:31, David Woodfall wrote:
>
> My .procmailrc-lists is populated with eg:
>
> :0
> * ^.*mutt-users@mutt.org*
> lists/mutt-users@mutt.org/
>
> Which catches mail To or Cc the mailing list,
Or in the Subject, or elsewhere. As a hack, it'll probably mostly work
most of the time, beca
On (12/02/13 19:33), Erik Christiansen put forth the
proposition:
On 12.02.13 13:57, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 11Feb2013 15:40, Will Yardley wrote:
| Also, an off-list copy that you receive, but CCd to the list, will not
| have the rfc2369 headers, which mnight explain the inconsistent behavi
- Erik Christiansen [2013-02-12 19:33:30 +1100]
- :
> It has been particularly annoying that in either case the directly
> addressed copy arrives first, so that it is always the list copy which
> goes into duplicates. That resulted in list mail in the personal folder.
> But none of this
On 12.02.13 13:57, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 11Feb2013 15:40, Will Yardley wrote:
> | Also, an off-list copy that you receive, but CCd to the list, will not
> | have the rfc2369 headers, which mnight explain the inconsistent behavior
> | that one user mentioned.
>
> Indeed. That goes both ways
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 03:40:14PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:30:32AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:46:34AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +, Chris Green wrote:
>
> > > > If you have the list in you
On 11Feb2013 15:40, Will Yardley wrote:
| On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:30:32AM +, Chris Green wrote:
| > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:46:34AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
| > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +, Chris Green wrote:
|
| > > > If you have the list in your .muutrc 'subscribe'
On 10Feb2013 07:32, Russell L. Harris wrote:
| * David Woodfall [130210 00:45]:
| > I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
| > instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
| > doesn't recognise it as a list and I have
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:30:32AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:46:34AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > If you have the list in your .muutrc 'subscribe' and or 'lists' commands
> > > then the correct way
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:46:34AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:32:13AM +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> > > * David Woodfall [130210 00:45]:
> > > > I've a few maili
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:31:23AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:32:13AM +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> > * David Woodfall [130210 00:45]:
> > > I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> > > instead they
On (10/02/13 08:33), Patrick Shanahan put forth the
proposition:
* David Woodfall [02-10-13 08:27]:
On (10/02/13 07:35), James Griffin put forth the
proposition:
>--> David Woodfall [2013-02-10 00:42:27 +]:
>
>>I've a few mailing lists where people don't
* David Woodfall [02-10-13 08:27]:
> On (10/02/13 07:35), James Griffin put forth the
> proposition:
> >--> David Woodfall [2013-02-10 00:42:27 +]:
> >
> >>I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> >>instead t
On (10/02/13 13:25), David Woodfall put forth the
proposition:
On (10/02/13 07:35), James Griffin put forth the
proposition:
--> David Woodfall [2013-02-10 00:42:27 +]:
I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
instead they CC it. In which case
On (10/02/13 07:35), James Griffin put forth the
proposition:
--> David Woodfall [2013-02-10 00:42:27 +]:
I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
doesn't recognise it as a lis
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:32:13AM +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> * David Woodfall [130210 00:45]:
> > I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> > instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
> > doesn't recog
--> David Woodfall [2013-02-10 00:42:27 +]:
> I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
> doesn't recognise it as a list and I have to do a normal reply and
> manually p
* David Woodfall [130210 00:45]:
> I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
> doesn't recognise it as a list and I have to do a normal reply and
> manually put in the maili
On (10/02/13 02:08), David Woodfall put forth the
proposition:
On (09/02/13 20:08), Patrick Shanahan put forth the
proposition:
* David Woodfall [02-09-13 19:44]:
I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
instead they CC it. In which case when I re
On (09/02/13 20:08), Patrick Shanahan put forth the
proposition:
* David Woodfall [02-09-13 19:44]:
I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
doesn't recognise it as a list and I have
* David Woodfall [02-09-13 19:44]:
> I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
> instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
> doesn't recognise it as a list and I have to do a normal reply and
> manually put in the maili
I've a few mailing lists where people don't send to the mailing list
instead they CC it. In which case when I reply to the list mutt
doesn't recognise it as a list and I have to do a normal reply and
manually put in the mailing list address in the send field.
Is there a way of
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:31:41AM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from lambda:
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 01:25:44PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:54:05AM +0200, lambda calculus wrote:
> >
> > I was using gmail, And now i have configured mutt to read gmail us
IMAP server. You're also using mutt's builtin
IMAP support to do it.
[I'm okay now.]
> > > Since I'm subscribed to a couple of mailing lists i would like to
> > > configure mutt to store mails from different mailing lists to
> > > different directories
using before?
I was using gmail, And now i have configured mutt to read gmail using
mutt.
> > Since I'm subscribed to a couple of mailing lists i would like to
> > configure mutt to store mails from different mailing lists to
> > different directories.
> >
> > Let&#
1 - 100 of 284 matches
Mail list logo
