[users] get rid of Reply-To

[David Hrbáč]

Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

It's been discussed awhile ago. As far as I understand it's Karanbir's /
Dag's policy which I can't really understand the motivation of.

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

It's been discussed awhile ago. As far as I understand it's Karanbir's /
Dag's policy which I can't really understand the motivation of.

To be honest, I was not involved by defining the mailinglist policy. I
only modified the svn-commits mailinglist so a reply would not go to the
read-only list, but I didn't touch the other mailinglists.

Let me compare the settings with a default mailman mailinglist and see if
I can see something that is incorrect.

PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Dag Wieers
PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)
--

In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.

FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

I've seen arguments for both points of view, and as has been said, there
will be arguments on both sides.

[Angenendt, Ralph]

Post by Scott Robbins

Post by Dag Wieers
PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)
--

In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.
FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

If you hit "L" for List-Reply (if that is a list), it goes just to the list.

Ralph

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100922/55581fe1/attachment.bin

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Angenendt, Ralph

Post by Scott Robbins
In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.
FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

If you hit "L" for List-Reply (if that is a list), it goes just to the list.
Ralph

Heh--all these years of mutt, and I never knew that one. I did know
about setting subscribe in .muttrc, but have been too lazy to do it for
a list where I so seldom contribute.

Merci beaucoup. (Hope I spelled it right.)
Have to add that to my mutt page. Thanks again.

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Scott Robbins

Ralph

Heh--all these years of mutt, and I never knew that one. I did know
about setting subscribe in .muttrc, but have been too lazy to do it for
a list where I so seldom contribute.

Ah, I see why I didn't know. Way back when I first used mutt, it was
necessary to have the subscribe lines in your .muttrc. (Or perhaps it
was necessary for mutt-ng which I used for awhile.)
--
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

Spike: What's Big Blue doing anyway?
The Judge: I am preparing.
Spike: It's interesting to me that preparing looks a great bit
like sitting on your ass.

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Scott Robbins

Ralph

Heh--all these years of mutt, and I never knew that one. I did know
about setting subscribe in .muttrc, but have been too lazy to do it for
a list where I so seldom contribute.

Ah, I see why I didn't know. Way back when I first used mutt, it was
necessary to have the subscribe lines in your .muttrc. (Or perhaps it
was necessary for mutt-ng which I used for awhile.)
--
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

Spike: What's Big Blue doing anyway?
The Judge: I am preparing.
Spike: It's interesting to me that preparing looks a great bit
like sitting on your ass.

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Angenendt, Ralph

Post by Scott Robbins
In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.
FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

If you hit "L" for List-Reply (if that is a list), it goes just to the list.
Ralph

Heh--all these years of mutt, and I never knew that one. I did know
about setting subscribe in .muttrc, but have been too lazy to do it for
a list where I so seldom contribute.

Merci beaucoup. (Hope I spelled it right.)
Have to add that to my mutt page. Thanks again.

[Angenendt, Ralph]

Post by Scott Robbins

Post by Dag Wieers
PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)
--

In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.
FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

If you hit "L" for List-Reply (if that is a list), it goes just to the list.

Ralph

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100922/55581fe1/attachment-0001.bin

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Dag Wieers
PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)
--

In mutt, I find that hitting r (for reply) goes only to you. If I do g
as in group, it goes to you (Dag) and the list.

FWIW my vote is to change the reply-to so that it goes to list.

I've seen arguments for both points of view, and as has been said, there
will be arguments on both sides.

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

It's been discussed awhile ago. As far as I understand it's Karanbir's /
Dag's policy which I can't really understand the motivation of.

To be honest, I was not involved by defining the mailinglist policy. I
only modified the svn-commits mailinglist so a reply would not go to the
read-only list, but I didn't touch the other mailinglists.

Let me compare the settings with a default mailman mailinglist and see if
I can see something that is incorrect.

PS I also never had any issues myself, a reply (in alpine) replies to all
people involved. (In this case Yury, David and the list)

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?

Also, i think the rpmforge lists were always setup like this, and it
seems to be working fine.

- KB

[Ned Slider]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?
Also, i think the rpmforge lists were always setup like this, and it
seems to be working fine.
- KB

The "problem" is that Reply-To: <users at lists.rpmforge.net> isn't set so
replies go the the poster, not the list. Some lists do it this way
whereas others reply to the list by default (eg, CentOS MLs).

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Ned Slider

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?

The "problem" is that Reply-To: <users at lists.rpmforge.net> isn't set so
replies go the the poster, not the list. Some lists do it this way
whereas others reply to the list by default (eg, CentOS MLs).

David seem's to be asking for Reply-To removal not addition. Also this
issue has been hacked so many hundreds of times all over the place. Ends
up just being a matter of policy. Either way you swing it there will be
people will issues.

Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

I leave it to you to deduce which mode of replying I have used. :-)

Alan.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?


- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

KB,

You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.

If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

Regards,
Alan.

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the
urge to contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists,
email clients or how they are implemented.

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the urge to
contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists, email clients
or how they are implemented.

Young man, please grow up.

I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

Alan.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett
I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

I couldnt care less what you make of my communication ability, and I
also couldnt care less about your idea of the English language or my
intention to use it.

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Alan Bartlett
I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

I couldnt care less what you make of my communication ability, and I also
couldnt care less about your idea of the English language or my intention to
use it.

Be gone, you arrogant little young man.

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Alan Bartlett
I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

I couldnt care less what you make of my communication ability, and I also
couldnt care less about your idea of the English language or my intention to
use it.

Be gone, you arrogant little young man.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett
I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

I couldnt care less what you make of my communication ability, and I
also couldnt care less about your idea of the English language or my
intention to use it.

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Hi,

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the urge to
contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists, email clients
or how they are implemented.

Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

Either (1) provide references to attempt to validate his absurd and
scurrilous last sentence, above: "You clearly dont understand either
mailing lists, email clients or how they are implemented." (sic)

Or (2) unreservedly apologise on this m/l.

The world will then judge him on his (next) actions.

Regards,
Alan.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi Alan!

I really don't think that this argument is worth pursuing.

It's a classical example of mutual intolerance when first Karanbir
misinterpreted your (ambiguous) statement, and you both followed up by
escalating this worthless conflict by attacking each other personally.

Maybe you should try to fix this without resorting to public trials...

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi Alan!
I really don't think that this argument is worth pursuing.
It's a classical example of mutual intolerance when first Karanbir
misinterpreted your (ambiguous) statement, and you both followed up by
escalating this worthless conflict by attacking each other personally.
Maybe you should try to fix this without resorting to public trials...

I agree. I've been watching this with major amusement. After all - you
run linux. You don't like how the mailing list works, use procmail to
alter the email for yourself without whinging and moaning that the whole
world has to do things in a way that makes you happy.

For example, I hate mailing lists that have [blah] in the subject. So
instead of complaining, I have this in my procmailrc:

## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
| sed -e '/^Subject:/ s/\[users\] *//g'
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/

I'm pretty sure you could easily adapt this to what most people would
want - whatever the case might be.

So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

[Bill McGonigle]

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

-Bill

P.S. anybody think we could adopt the RHEL5 bucardo package? :)

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

Well, it looks like the current headers are as such:
Reply-To: Discussions by users about RPMforge packages
<users at lists.rpmforge.net>

As a quick knockup, it'd be something like this:

## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
| sed -e '/^Reply-To.*/Reply-To:users\@lists\.rpmforge\.net/g'
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/

I haven't tested this, and it probably won't work if the Reply-To is
split over two lines, however someone much better with sed could
probably fix this in a matter of seconds :)

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Steven Haigh

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

Reply-To: Discussions by users about RPMforge packages
<users at lists.rpmforge.net>
## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/
I haven't tested this, and it probably won't work if the Reply-To is
split over two lines, however someone much better with sed could
probably fix this in a matter of seconds :)

In fact, on further thought, all procmail is doing is running a command
and supplying the email via stdin. This means you could do it in bash /
perl / python / whatever and write whatever you want to get the desired
result. You could easily rewrite the whole email if you wanted to...

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Steven Haigh

Post by Steven Haigh

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

Reply-To: Discussions by users about RPMforge packages
<users at lists.rpmforge.net>
## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/
I haven't tested this, and it probably won't work if the Reply-To is
split over two lines, however someone much better with sed could
probably fix this in a matter of seconds :)

In fact, on further thought, all procmail is doing is running a command
and supplying the email via stdin. This means you could do it in bash /
perl / python / whatever and write whatever you want to get the desired
result. You could easily rewrite the whole email if you wanted to...

Ok, so I got curious.... There seems to be an even simpler way:

:0 fhw
^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
| formail -i "Reply-To: users at lists.rpmforge.net"

This should change the reply-to to the list if it isn't already set to
that. This assumes that it is not done as the default on the mailing list...

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Steven Haigh

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

Reply-To: Discussions by users about RPMforge packages
<users at lists.rpmforge.net>
## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/
I haven't tested this, and it probably won't work if the Reply-To is
split over two lines, however someone much better with sed could
probably fix this in a matter of seconds :)

In fact, on further thought, all procmail is doing is running a command
and supplying the email via stdin. This means you could do it in bash /
perl / python / whatever and write whatever you want to get the desired
result. You could easily rewrite the whole email if you wanted to...

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

Well, it looks like the current headers are as such:
Reply-To: Discussions by users about RPMforge packages
<users at lists.rpmforge.net>

As a quick knockup, it'd be something like this:

## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
| sed -e '/^Reply-To.*/Reply-To:users\@lists\.rpmforge\.net/g'
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/

I haven't tested this, and it probably won't work if the Reply-To is
split over two lines, however someone much better with sed could
probably fix this in a matter of seconds :)

[Bill McGonigle]

Post by Steven Haigh
So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

Good call, Steven. Does anybody have a recipe for knocking out Reply-To
headers?

-Bill

P.S. anybody think we could adopt the RHEL5 bucardo package? :)

[Steven Haigh]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi Alan!
I really don't think that this argument is worth pursuing.
It's a classical example of mutual intolerance when first Karanbir
misinterpreted your (ambiguous) statement, and you both followed up by
escalating this worthless conflict by attacking each other personally.
Maybe you should try to fix this without resorting to public trials...

I agree. I've been watching this with major amusement. After all - you
run linux. You don't like how the mailing list works, use procmail to
alter the email for yourself without whinging and moaning that the whole
world has to do things in a way that makes you happy.

For example, I hate mailing lists that have [blah] in the subject. So
instead of complaining, I have this in my procmailrc:

## RPMForge email
:0 f
* ^X-BeenThere:.*users at lists.rpmforge.net
| sed -e '/^Subject:/ s/\[users\] *//g'
:0 A
.Mail\ Lists.RPMForge/

I'm pretty sure you could easily adapt this to what most people would
want - whatever the case might be.

So, lets all stop complaining and take control over your own stuff!

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I
dont see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both
wrong and irrelevant.

Post by Alan Bartlett
Either (1) provide references to attempt to validate his absurd and
scurrilous last sentence, above: "You clearly dont understand either
mailing lists, email clients or how they are implemented." (sic)

I have done so already, if you suffer comprehension disabiliteies - I am
sure there is help for that sort of a thing around these days.

Post by Alan Bartlett
Or (2) unreservedly apologise on this m/l.
The world will then judge him on his (next) actions.

You think I care ? What concerns me more is doing the right thing, not
winning a popularity contest.

- KB

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont
see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both wrong and
irrelevant.

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.

So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

[Todd Lyons]

Post by Dag Wieers

?Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

[Nicolas Thierry-Mieg]

Post by Todd Lyons

Post by Dag Wieers

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

as predicted by someone early in this thread, both choices lead to
unhappy users...

Seeing a lot of negative reactions to the new behaviour, but FWIW I
think it's a lot better.
I would say at least 99% of replies to an ml should be directed to the
ml and not the poster. On this ml less experienced users sometimes reply
to the sender only, simply hitting reply and thinking it will behave the
same as most [*] other lists - reply to the list. It's an unnecessary
nuisance for the person receiving that reply, and a source of confusion
for the sender.

But - whatever. Not worth a war.

[*] at least most of the ones I'm on

[Ned Slider]

Post by Todd Lyons

Post by Dag Wieers

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

hmm, if I click Reply All in Thunderbird the reply goes to the list and
the OP (you) are in the CC. Personally I think that's perfectly
reasonable as others have said - in the vast majority of cases the reply
should be destined for the list, not the OP.

You still have the choice, just that now the default behaviour makes
more sense in the vast majority of cases.

[Nicolas Thierry-Mieg]

Post by Todd Lyons

Post by Dag Wieers

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

as predicted by someone early in this thread, both choices lead to
unhappy users...

Seeing a lot of negative reactions to the new behaviour, but FWIW I
think it's a lot better.
I would say at least 99% of replies to an ml should be directed to the
ml and not the poster. On this ml less experienced users sometimes reply
to the sender only, simply hitting reply and thinking it will behave the
same as most [*] other lists - reply to the list. It's an unnecessary
nuisance for the person receiving that reply, and a source of confusion
for the sender.

But - whatever. Not worth a war.

[*] at least most of the ones I'm on

[Ned Slider]

Post by Todd Lyons

Post by Dag Wieers

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

hmm, if I click Reply All in Thunderbird the reply goes to the list and
the OP (you) are in the CC. Personally I think that's perfectly
reasonable as others have said - in the vast majority of cases the reply
should be destined for the list, not the OP.

You still have the choice, just that now the default behaviour makes
more sense in the vast majority of cases.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Dag Wieers
Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the
other "the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.

You are incorrectly assuming that mailman is only used by public lists,
or even for subscriber driven lists. The mailman developers actually
clearly state the facts in their docs and point to the relevant places
so that people can make a decision based on policy they might want to
implement.

Mailman is, at its basics, a mail reflector. Public mailing lists are
only one of the roles its deployed in.

Post by Dag Wieers
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

The 'assumption' you base your 'think' on is flawed, which makes the
assumption irrelevantt too.

For the sake of completeness :

my comment on 'irrelevant' was based on the fact that this whole process
is irrelevant. Educating people in this case would have achieved a
better overall result, IMHO - than changing behaviour of the list. No
matter which way you swing it, people will have issues - and addressing
the issue from the perspective of a small group ( @gmail is a very small
group of content contribution here to the lists ) isnt the best way to
handle things.

Anyway, since you have decided to take up all mailman activity, I'm
staying clear of it - I guess some level of ambiguity arises from the
fact that noone really knows who's doing what and when. Its important we
resolve that. I had created a ticket[1] requesting a wiki page, I am
sure that will come through and we can document the group doing the work
and perhaps co-ordinate efforts a bit.

- KB

1: http://trac.rpmrepo.org/trac/RPMRepo/ticket/4

[Todd Lyons]

Post by Dag Wieers

?Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.
So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

How about "removing choice" from your ML subscribers? With your
addition, I have no choice but to reply to the ML and only to the ML
without manually changing the To or Cc. With it before, the sender
had the ability to direct replies directly to himself by setting the
Reply-To or allow it to go back to the list by not setting it. I hit
"Reply To All" and instead of going to you and the ML, it went only to
the mailing list. It is a matter of preferences though, and if, as
list owner, you prefer it to be that way, then we have no choice but
to acquiesce.

[Ned Slider]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I
dont see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both
wrong and irrelevant.

Does this mean the CentOS mailing lists are also "wrong and irrelevant"
as that is how they are configured (and many others too)?

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Ned Slider
Does this mean the CentOS mailing lists are also "wrong and irrelevant"
as that is how they are configured (and many others too)?

I am not sure why people think the rpmforge project is a sub project or
a direct relative of the CentOS project... but anwyay since the question
is asked : I wasent involved with the centos lists, and they were setup
in an incorrect way ( imho ).

however, changing the game once an established audience is already in
place, where people already have an expected behaviour of the process
isnt worthwhile.

Have you guys actually read the relevant docs on this issue ?

- KB

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Karanbir Singh
Have you guys actually read the relevant docs on this issue ?

The ones you linked to? These are just essays which try to make
themselves sound by recurring to the interpretation of IETF RFCs, which
might be interpreted one way or another or agreed / disagreed with.

I personally don't see how the statements quoted from this latest RFC
are proving the point of anti-mungling proponents and I don't agree with
their conclusions.

What I care more about is the lists being usable. In this specific case,
I have nothing to lose either way, because RPMForge lists already forced
me to take up the habit of using Reply to All.

But I know of, for example, "properly configured" Python Imaging lists,
which are completely useless, because 90% traffic goes off the list.
Guess what? Most of the audience of these lists don't find this behavior
"consistent" (consistency being one of main anti-munglers arguments).

Of course, you might state, that this only illustrates how 90% of the
audience of this specific list are idiots, but what does it change? Go
ahead, educate them (i.e. show them, that their idea of consistency is
wrong, it's a nice approach to usability), but the others will come one
month later and the show will go on.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
The ones you linked to? These are just essays which try to make
themselves sound by recurring to the interpretation of IETF RFCs, which
might be interpreted one way or another or agreed / disagreed with.

they are essays - much like any argument of this nature would be, and I
dont really want to write them all out here. Hence the pointers to the
essays online already.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
I personally don't see how the statements quoted from this latest RFC
are proving the point of anti-mungling proponents and I don't agree with
their conclusions.

You dont agree with email working the way email is meant to ? That does
not sound very convincing.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Of course, you might state, that this only illustrates how 90% of the
audience of this specific list are idiots, but what does it change? Go

If its a list of idiots, its not them - but the others who neal to haul
out of there. But this 90% figure does seem quite large. Where did that
come from ? what list is this ? I am on a few python lists, and dont see
any noise of this nature.

- KB

[Ned Slider]

Post by Karanbir Singh
Hi,

Post by Ned Slider
Does this mean the CentOS mailing lists are also "wrong and irrelevant"
as that is how they are configured (and many others too)?

I am not sure why people think the rpmforge project is a sub project or
a direct relative of the CentOS project... but anwyay since the question
is asked : I wasent involved with the centos lists, and they were setup
in an incorrect way ( imho ).

I don't, but since you're a lead developer for the CentOS project it
makes sense that you swallow some of your own medicine... but you've now
addressed that point herein :-)

Post by Karanbir Singh
however, changing the game once an established audience is already in
place, where people already have an expected behaviour of the process
isnt worthwhile.
Have you guys actually read the relevant docs on this issue ?

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Ned Slider

Post by Karanbir Singh
I am not sure why people think the rpmforge project is a sub project or
a direct relative of the CentOS project...

I don't, but since you're a lead developer for the CentOS project it
makes sense that you swallow some of your own medicine... but you've now
addressed that point herein :-)

ah, my misunderstanding! Btw, Ralph is the list manager there in centos
lands, I'd still make a case for how I see things but its his call in
the end.

- KB

[Angenendt, Ralph]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Ned Slider

Post by Karanbir Singh
I am not sure why people think the rpmforge project is a sub project or
a direct relative of the CentOS project...

I don't, but since you're a lead developer for the CentOS project it
makes sense that you swallow some of your own medicine... but you've now
addressed that point herein :-)

ah, my misunderstanding! Btw, Ralph is the list manager there in centos
lands, I'd still make a case for how I see things but its his call in
the end.

Yeah, but I did not set up the initial lists :) And the others are
configured the same as the main lists, as to avoid confusion.

Otherwise I am strongly against setting reply-to to the list, but this
really needn't be discussed here.

My mail programs allow me to react accordingly.

Regards,

Ralph

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100927/ee493968/attachment.bin

[Hugo van der Kooij]

On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 12:07:55 +0100, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org>

Post by Karanbir Singh
Have you guys actually read the relevant docs on this issue ?

I read them. And I still don't agree with them. It's just a point of view
on how to direct answers back to a mailinglist for most users. I prefer NOT
to get duplicates so I prefer the Reply-To: headers that will just send 1
message to the mailinglist.

Which choice is the most usefull depends on many factors that need to be
considered. For this list I hardly see any use for posting outside the
mailinglist. SO I would perefer to keep the Reply-To: header.

Hugo.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Hugo van der Kooij
Which choice is the most usefull depends on many factors that need to be
considered. For this list I hardly see any use for posting outside the
mailinglist. SO I would perefer to keep the Reply-To: header.

If the reply-to: header was already being set from when the list was
started, I'd agree with you.

- KB

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Hugo van der Kooij
Which choice is the most usefull depends on many factors that need to be
considered. For this list I hardly see any use for posting outside the
mailinglist. SO I would perefer to keep the Reply-To: header.

If the reply-to: header was already being set from when the list was started,
I'd agree with you.

This really mystifies me.

Imagine that we really want to do this because we want this behaviour for
new users, would you then prefer to migrate everyone to a new mailinglist
in order not to change an existing mailinglist ? Or is it really not that
important to you, but you simply disagree with changing a behaviour (no
matter what way) ?

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Hugo van der Kooij
Which choice is the most usefull depends on many factors that need to be

If the reply-to: header was already being set from when the list was

mailinglist in order not to change an existing mailinglist ? Or is it
really not that important to you, but you simply disagree with changing
a behaviour (no matter what way) ?

I could have been clearer in my reply to Hugo. What I mean is that I
think that the 'right' thing to do for this list is still to not add a
reply-to header, its not a forced community[1]. If that was being done
from day.1 - whatever be the reasons, it would make sense to just leave
it as is. But taking something that is working right and changing it
makes no sense to me.

W.r.t the point that Hugo made about posts to this list not going
offlist at all, I dont think thats right. In many cases, it will make
sense to involve and retain involvement of upstream or parallel
packagers who may or maynot be on the list. Forcing a reply-to does a
good job of killing that option for most MUA's, specially the ones doing
the right thing.[2]

Given that MUA's will give you the option to handle reply either way,
changing the headers does not help anyone. Then there is also the issue
with spam testing and you now need to check an extra return path for
every inbound email.

- KB

[1]: eg. within a company or a development group inside a closed user
group. The only sort of setup that needs to enforce the reply-to header.

[2]: I am assuming here that smtp as a spec is the right thing.

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I dont
see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both wrong and
irrelevant.

Obviously even the mailman developers don't consider one way or the other
"the right thing" as they clearly allow us to configure it this way.

So I think "wrong" and "irrelevant" may be small exagerations.

[Ned Slider]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I
dont see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both
wrong and irrelevant.

Does this mean the CentOS mailing lists are also "wrong and irrelevant"
as that is how they are configured (and many others too)?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi Alan!

I really don't think that this argument is worth pursuing.

It's a classical example of mutual intolerance when first Karanbir
misinterpreted your (ambiguous) statement, and you both followed up by
escalating this worthless conflict by attacking each other personally.

Maybe you should try to fix this without resorting to public trials...

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

I dont agree with what Dag has done - and will take it up with him, I
dont see why he needs to please someone by doing something that is both
wrong and irrelevant.

Post by Alan Bartlett
Either (1) provide references to attempt to validate his absurd and
scurrilous last sentence, above: "You clearly dont understand either
mailing lists, email clients or how they are implemented." (sic)

I have done so already, if you suffer comprehension disabiliteies - I am
sure there is help for that sort of a thing around these days.

Post by Alan Bartlett
Or (2) unreservedly apologise on this m/l.
The world will then judge him on his (next) actions.

You think I care ? What concerns me more is doing the right thing, not
winning a popularity contest.

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the urge to
contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists, email clients
or how they are implemented.

Young man, please grow up.

I will allow, to a limited extent, your misuse of the English
language. But don't use it as an excuse to "try it on".

Alan.

[Alan Bartlett]

Hi,

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the urge to
contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists, email clients
or how they are implemented.

Now that Dag has taken back control of the RPMforge m/ls, took note of
the information provided by Akemi and corrected the issue, there is
just one outstanding issue for Karanbir Singh to resolve --

Either (1) provide references to attempt to validate his absurd and
scurrilous last sentence, above: "You clearly dont understand either
mailing lists, email clients or how they are implemented." (sic)

Or (2) unreservedly apologise on this m/l.

The world will then judge him on his (next) actions.

Regards,
Alan.

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Alan Bartlett
You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.
If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

if you dont know what you are talking about, feel free to resist the
urge to contribute. You clearly dont understand either mailing lists,
email clients or how they are implemented.

- KB

[Akemi Yagi]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

This is not a mail client issue. With the same gmail, Reply-To gives
"the list" as the reply-to address in the case of the CentOS mailing
lists.

The option is set up in the mailman's general section. More specifically,

"Where are replies to list messages directed?"

You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"

I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

Akemi

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Akemi Yagi
You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"
I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

The whole point really is that where do you want default replies going
to and what policy is going to be implemented around there. Eg look here
: http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html and then
look at this : http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.html

Its not a case of do as you will, its centered around policy[1]. If you
are saying that there is need to change what is implemented here, doing
so on a merit of requirements and stating what the goal is going to be
would be the way to go really.

- KB

[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Karanbir Singh
[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

We've not argued the issue on <rpm-devel at rpm5.org> yet.

Feel free to add a CC if you wish. Oy waith, does CC work with Repy-To:? Damfino ...

73 de Jeff

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Karanbir Singh
[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

We've not argued the issue on<rpm-devel at rpm5.org> yet.

it will come :)

- KB

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Karanbir Singh
[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

We've not argued the issue on<rpm-devel at rpm5.org> yet.

it will come :)

- KB

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Karanbir Singh
[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

We've not argued the issue on <rpm-devel at rpm5.org> yet.

Feel free to add a CC if you wish. Oy waith, does CC work with Repy-To:? Damfino ...

73 de Jeff

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Akemi Yagi

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

This is not a mail client issue. With the same gmail, Reply-To gives
"the list" as the reply-to address in the case of the CentOS mailing
lists.
The option is set up in the mailman's general section. More specifically,
"Where are replies to list messages directed?"
You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"
I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/

I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me
anyway. I am sorry to not have acted earlier, I wasn't involved in the
previous discussion, was not in charge of the mailinglist and didn't
realize how it affected members of the list. Now that Dries is no longer
involved I will act as the mailinglist administrator for the time being.

So if you have any other suggestions, let me know !

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Dag Wieers
Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/
I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me

Works like a charm. :) I just hit r, and sure enough, going to the
list.
--
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

Buffy: I can't believe you got into Oxford!
Willow: It's pretty exciting.
Oz: That's some deep academia there.
Buffy: That's where they make Gileses!
Willow: I know! I can learn, and have scones!

[Akemi Yagi]

Post by Dag Wieers
Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/
I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me

Works like a charm. ?:) ?I just hit r, and sure enough, going to the
list.

Working for me as well (who just hit the Reply button). I often used
to reply only to the poster when I meant to reply to the list. That
"accident" will not happen again.

Akemi

[Akemi Yagi]

Post by Dag Wieers
Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/
I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me

Works like a charm. ?:) ?I just hit r, and sure enough, going to the
list.

Working for me as well (who just hit the Reply button). I often used
to reply only to the poster when I meant to reply to the list. That
"accident" will not happen again.

Akemi

[Scott Robbins]

Post by Dag Wieers
Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/
I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me

Works like a charm. :) I just hit r, and sure enough, going to the
list.
--
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

Buffy: I can't believe you got into Oxford!
Willow: It's pretty exciting.
Oz: That's some deep academia there.
Buffy: That's where they make Gileses!
Willow: I know! I can learn, and have scones!

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Akemi Yagi
You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"
I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

The whole point really is that where do you want default replies going
to and what policy is going to be implemented around there. Eg look here
: http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html and then
look at this : http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.html

Its not a case of do as you will, its centered around policy[1]. If you
are saying that there is need to change what is implemented here, doing
so on a merit of requirements and stating what the goal is going to be
would be the way to go really.

- KB

[1] and has probabally been argued around on every list there is.

[Dag Wieers]

Post by Akemi Yagi

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

This is not a mail client issue. With the same gmail, Reply-To gives
"the list" as the reply-to address in the case of the CentOS mailing
lists.
The option is set up in the mailman's general section. More specifically,
"Where are replies to list messages directed?"
You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"
I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

Thanks Akemi, I hadn't read your message earlier :-/

I have now changed this to "This list" which makes a lot more sense to me
anyway. I am sorry to not have acted earlier, I wasn't involved in the
previous discussion, was not in charge of the mailinglist and didn't
realize how it affected members of the list. Now that Dries is no longer
involved I will act as the mailinglist administrator for the time being.

So if you have any other suggestions, let me know !

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

You guys are hilarious. So much of an argument for such a worthless
reason. And, for the record...

I use Evolution 2.22.3.1 and there's no special treatment for lists, so
I've been forced to take up a new habit of using Reply To All for every
single message I receive.

I can't upgrade my mail client. Does this imply that I am an idiot?
--
Sincerely yours,
Yury V. Zaytsev

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?
- KB
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users at lists.rpmforge.net
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
I use Evolution 2.22.3.1 and there's no special treatment for lists, so
I've been forced to take up a new habit of using Reply To All for every
single message I receive.

Here is something that David put together from when he was still using
Evo. You might find it somewhat interesting :

http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
I can't upgrade my mail client. Does this imply that I am an idiot?

If your mail client makes you feel like an idiot perhaps it really might
be a good idea to consider changing it - if you are in an environment
where you can.

How about top posting ? is that something you can accomodate ?

- KB

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Karanbir Singh
Here is something that David put together from when he was still using
http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html

Hmmm, this describes a much more recent version of Evo that I have.

Post by Karanbir Singh
If your mail client makes you feel like an idiot perhaps it really might
be a good idea to consider changing it - if you are in an environment
where you can.

Well, first, I can't, and I might not be alone in this regard.

Second, it doesn't actually make me feel as such, it's just that after I
became frequent contributor to the lists, that don't do mungling I had
to re-teach myself to use Reply To All, which I find annoying in spite
of whomever says it's good.

I was rather referring to the fact that disqualifying people on the
basis of the e-mail client that they currently use (or rather have to
use) is not really so much open-minded.

Post by Karanbir Singh
How about top posting ? is that something you can accomodate ?

In general I don't see a problem with this, unless the quoted part is
bigger than *one* previous message. Evo just cuts it off if the
signature is well-formed and it's handy to check up on stuff without
switching to the previous message in the thread.

Do you have a magic link for this?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Karanbir Singh
Here is something that David put together from when he was still using
http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html

Hmmm, this describes a much more recent version of Evo that I have.

Post by Karanbir Singh
If your mail client makes you feel like an idiot perhaps it really might
be a good idea to consider changing it - if you are in an environment
where you can.

Well, first, I can't, and I might not be alone in this regard.

Second, it doesn't actually make me feel as such, it's just that after I
became frequent contributor to the lists, that don't do mungling I had
to re-teach myself to use Reply To All, which I find annoying in spite
of whomever says it's good.

I was rather referring to the fact that disqualifying people on the
basis of the e-mail client that they currently use (or rather have to
use) is not really so much open-minded.

Post by Karanbir Singh
How about top posting ? is that something you can accomodate ?

In general I don't see a problem with this, unless the quoted part is
bigger than *one* previous message. Evo just cuts it off if the
signature is well-formed and it's handy to check up on stuff without
switching to the previous message in the thread.

Do you have a magic link for this?

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
I use Evolution 2.22.3.1 and there's no special treatment for lists, so
I've been forced to take up a new habit of using Reply To All for every
single message I receive.

Here is something that David put together from when he was still using
Evo. You might find it somewhat interesting :

http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
I can't upgrade my mail client. Does this imply that I am an idiot?

If your mail client makes you feel like an idiot perhaps it really might
be a good idea to consider changing it - if you are in an environment
where you can.

How about top posting ? is that something you can accomodate ?

- KB

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

KB,

You are being a "smart-arse" to the wrong person. I have not
complained nor asked for anything. The only thing I have done is to
provide an example as an answer to your question. A question which
seems to imply that you do not know or understand everything.

If you have nothing sensible to say, please remain quiet.

Regards,
Alan.

[Akemi Yagi]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?

This is not a mail client issue. With the same gmail, Reply-To gives
"the list" as the reply-to address in the case of the CentOS mailing
lists.

The option is set up in the mailman's general section. More specifically,

"Where are replies to list messages directed?"

You can choose from: "Poster" "This list" and "Explicit address"

I suspect it is set to the "Poster" in the rpmforge mailing lists.

Akemi

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

You guys are hilarious. So much of an argument for such a worthless
reason. And, for the record...

I use Evolution 2.22.3.1 and there's no special treatment for lists, so
I've been forced to take up a new habit of using Reply To All for every
single message I receive.

I can't upgrade my mail client. Does this imply that I am an idiot?
--
Sincerely yours,
Yury V. Zaytsev

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?
- KB
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users at lists.rpmforge.net
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users

[Bill McGonigle]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.
I leave it to you to deduce which mode of replying I have used.:-)

Personally, I don't get why some folks think it's the mailing list's job
to make those two MUA buttons behave the same way, despite their
different UI semantics.

That is, rpmforge-users appears to be properly configured.

-Bill

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Alan Bartlett

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

Get a better mail client ?


- KB

[Bill McGonigle]

Post by Alan Bartlett
Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.
I leave it to you to deduce which mode of replying I have used.:-)

Personally, I don't get why some folks think it's the mailing list's job
to make those two MUA buttons behave the same way, despite their
different UI semantics.

That is, rpmforge-users appears to be properly configured.

-Bill

[Alan Bartlett]

Post by Karanbir Singh
Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

Within Gmail, a "Reply" to this thread will just be sent to you,
whereas a "Reply to all" will be sent to you and CC'd to the list.

I leave it to you to deduce which mode of replying I have used. :-)

Alan.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by Ned Slider

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?

The "problem" is that Reply-To: <users at lists.rpmforge.net> isn't set so
replies go the the poster, not the list. Some lists do it this way
whereas others reply to the list by default (eg, CentOS MLs).

David seem's to be asking for Reply-To removal not addition. Also this
issue has been hacked so many hundreds of times all over the place. Ends
up just being a matter of policy. Either way you swing it there will be
people will issues.

Dont most mail clients have a reply-to-list option these days ?

- KB

[Ned Slider]

Post by Karanbir Singh

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?
Also, i think the rpmforge lists were always setup like this, and it
seems to be working fine.
- KB

The "problem" is that Reply-To: <users at lists.rpmforge.net> isn't set so
replies go the the poster, not the list. Some lists do it this way
whereas others reply to the list by default (eg, CentOS MLs).

[Fabian Arrotin]

Post by David Hrbáč
Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

Hmm, as other people answered, it's not configured to send a Reply-To.

And just to add my personal thought (even if i know that most don't
share it), I'd *prefer* having a Reply-To: on the RPMforge lists, like
it is configured on many other lists, .. (for example the CentOS-* ones
): we have to think about all people using the lists, and for sure i've
seen people answering only to the original poster and some posts later
including a part of the missed thread back to the list in CC: ..
I can understand people just hitting the 'reply' button of their $MUA
and you can't think all the time about "yeah, i'm on the RPMforge list,
i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah, i'm on a CentOS list, i don't
have to care, it will automatically be done ....". I still think that
99% of the cases cover a "i want to reply to the list" and only 1% "i
want to send a personal message to the sender"

--
Fabian Arrotin

[Michael Mansour]

Post by Fabian Arrotin

Post by David Hrbáč
Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

Hmm, as other people answered, it's not configured to send a Reply-To.
And just to add my personal thought (even if i know that most don't
share it), I'd *prefer* having a Reply-To: on the RPMforge lists,
like it is configured on many other lists, .. (for example the
CentOS-* ones ): we have to think about all people using the lists,
and for sure i've seen people answering only to the original poster
and some posts later including a part of the missed thread back to
the list in CC: .. I can understand people just hitting the 'reply'
button of their $MUA and you can't think all the time about "yeah,

For RPMforge I typically press "Reply to all" on my MUA, so I can get a reply
to the list, for others a "Reply" is sufficient as it replies to the list.

I have previously made the mistake on RPMforge by clicking "Reply" and
emailing the original sender.

I personally think a "Reply-To" to the list is the best way to go. Just my 1 cent.

Regards,

Michael.

Post by Fabian Arrotin
i'm on the RPMforge list, i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah,
i'm on a CentOS list, i don't have to care, it will automatically
be done ....". I still think that 99% of the cases cover a "i want
to reply to the list" and only 1% "i want to send a personal message
to the sender"
--
Fabian Arrotin
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users at lists.rpmforge.net
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users

------- End of Original Message -------

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Michael Mansour
I personally think a "Reply-To" to the list is the best way to go. Just my 1 cent.

Does reading through the two url's I posted make you change your mind ?

- KB

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Michael Mansour
I personally think a "Reply-To" to the list is the best way to go. Just my 1 cent.

Does reading through the two url's I posted make you change your mind ?

- KB

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Fabian Arrotin
I can understand people just hitting the 'reply' button of their $MUA
and you can't think all the time about "yeah, i'm on the RPMforge list,
i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah, i'm on a CentOS list, i don't

I noticed you are using thunderbird... as am I and that brings up a
clear 'Reply to List' button if the email has the relevant headers. I've
attached a screenshot of what that looks like.

Also attached a screenshot of what the msg-header-pane looks like when
there isnt a list definition in the mail headers.

- KB

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: kb-nonML.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19424 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : Loading Image...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rf-fabian.png
Type: image/png
Size: 20188 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : Loading Image...

[Michael Mansour]

Post by Fabian Arrotin

Post by David Hrbáč
Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

Hmm, as other people answered, it's not configured to send a Reply-To.
And just to add my personal thought (even if i know that most don't
share it), I'd *prefer* having a Reply-To: on the RPMforge lists,
like it is configured on many other lists, .. (for example the
CentOS-* ones ): we have to think about all people using the lists,
and for sure i've seen people answering only to the original poster
and some posts later including a part of the missed thread back to
the list in CC: .. I can understand people just hitting the 'reply'
button of their $MUA and you can't think all the time about "yeah,

For RPMforge I typically press "Reply to all" on my MUA, so I can get a reply
to the list, for others a "Reply" is sufficient as it replies to the list.

I have previously made the mistake on RPMforge by clicking "Reply" and
emailing the original sender.

I personally think a "Reply-To" to the list is the best way to go. Just my 1 cent.

Regards,

Michael.

Post by Fabian Arrotin
i'm on the RPMforge list, i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah,
i'm on a CentOS list, i don't have to care, it will automatically
be done ....". I still think that 99% of the cases cover a "i want
to reply to the list" and only 1% "i want to send a personal message
to the sender"
--
Fabian Arrotin
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users at lists.rpmforge.net
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users

------- End of Original Message -------

[Karanbir Singh]

Hi,

Post by Fabian Arrotin
I can understand people just hitting the 'reply' button of their $MUA
and you can't think all the time about "yeah, i'm on the RPMforge list,
i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah, i'm on a CentOS list, i don't

I noticed you are using thunderbird... as am I and that brings up a
clear 'Reply to List' button if the email has the relevant headers. I've
attached a screenshot of what that looks like.

Also attached a screenshot of what the msg-header-pane looks like when
there isnt a list definition in the mail headers.

- KB

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: kb-nonML.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19424 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : Loading Image...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rf-fabian.png
Type: image/png
Size: 20188 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : Loading Image...

[David Hrbáč]

Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

It's been discussed awhile ago. As far as I understand it's Karanbir's /
Dag's policy which I can't really understand the motivation of.

[Karanbir Singh]

Post by David Hrbáč
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.

As far as I can tell, none of the lists set a Reply-To. Where are you
seeing this ?

Also, i think the rpmforge lists were always setup like this, and it
seems to be working fine.

- KB

[Fabian Arrotin]

Post by David Hrbáč
Dag,
Would you be so kind and reconfigure lists not to send Reply-To? It's
quite annoying when replying.
Thanks,
DH

Hmm, as other people answered, it's not configured to send a Reply-To.

And just to add my personal thought (even if i know that most don't
share it), I'd *prefer* having a Reply-To: on the RPMforge lists, like
it is configured on many other lists, .. (for example the CentOS-* ones
): we have to think about all people using the lists, and for sure i've
seen people answering only to the original poster and some posts later
including a part of the missed thread back to the list in CC: ..
I can understand people just hitting the 'reply' button of their $MUA
and you can't think all the time about "yeah, i'm on the RPMforge list,
i have to cc the list itself" or "yeah, i'm on a CentOS list, i don't
have to care, it will automatically be done ....". I still think that
99% of the cases cover a "i want to reply to the list" and only 1% "i
want to send a personal message to the sender"

--
Fabian Arrotin