Hello members, In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her. Basically here are my suggestions: a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so. b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list. Again, all other lists that I am a member of provide this feature. Personally, I prefer the digest since the messages downloaded are fewer. I am sure the mailer program for SuSE lists has the digest feature. c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At http://lists.suse.com/archive/ I did not see any search capability. Perhaps they will listen if enough people voice their opinion. Thank you. -- Arun Khan <knura at yahoo dot com> Linux is a wigwam: No Windows, No Gates, Apache inside.
Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> writes:
Hello members,
In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her.
Basically here are my suggestions:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 12:26 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> writes:
Hello members,
In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her.
Basically here are my suggestions:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Andreas Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Friday 29 July 2005 13:27, Ken Schneider wrote: ---------------[ 8< ]-------------------------------------------------
Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
Well. This seems to work (Button 'Reply' in KMail) -- Kind regards P.M. Groen ________________________________________________________________________ guru, n: A computer owner who can read the manual.
On Friday 29 July 2005 12:27, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
Not true. As I and several others have pointed out, many mail programs simply provide a 'reply to list' feature, which works perfectly with the SuSE lists. My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are. -- Bill
On Friday 29 July 2005 7:39 am, William Gallafent wrote:
On Friday 29 July 2005 12:27, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
Not true. As I and several others have pointed out, many mail programs simply provide a 'reply to list' feature, which works perfectly with the SuSE lists.
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree. Fred -- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft. We have no bugs in our software, Never! We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost to you, at this time.
Fred A. Miller wrote:
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree.
+1 jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
** Reply to message from jdd sur free <jdanield@free.fr> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:21:45 +0200
Fred A. Miller wrote:
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree.
+1 jdd
Which goes to show that there is no way to please everyone, and perhaps also that change is sometimes difficult to tolerate. Personally, I think the present arrangement is the worst possible -- but then, I am as much entitled to express a view as anyone else. Among other things, the mere fact that the addressing arrangement differs from most other mailing lists on the planet speaks against it, from my _personal_ point of view. One of the great advantages of getting this forum as a newsgoup is that one sees it threaded. I don't have to evaluate each and every message for interest, for example, I can treat a whold thread as a unit. On a forum as active as this one, which threatens to flood my mailbox with its traffic, this is a non-trivial advantage. Posting through the newgroup is equally trouble free. It's great that there are enough alternatives to suit nearly everyone. Chacun a son gout Na vkus i na svet, tovarishchei nyet De gustibus non est disputandum 'Al ta'am ve'al reah., asur lehitvakeah. Different strokes for different folks -- Stan Goodman Qiryat Tiv'on Israel "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice." -- Proverbs 24:17
Hi Stan, On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:50:39 +0300 UTC (12:50 PM -0500 UTC my time), you wrote in part:
One of the great advantages of getting this forum as a newsgoup is that one sees it threaded. I don't have to evaluate each and every message for interest, for example, I can treat a whold thread as a unit.
any email client worth its salt can both thread and delete threads via one or two keystrokes. This really isn't problematic.
On Friday 29 July 2005 18:50, Stan Goodman wrote:
** Reply to message from jdd sur free <jdanield@free.fr> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:21:45 +0200
[I wrote]
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree.
+1 jdd
Which goes to show that there is no way to please everyone, and perhaps also that change is sometimes difficult to tolerate.
It doesn't show either of those. It shows that those two people have chosen to state that they agree with my point of view. I contest that the behaviour of the current configuration actually pleases those who suggest a change _more_ than the behaviour resulting from that change would. They just think it would, and are mistaken. Anyway, this is now way OT, so should move to the OT list or stop altogether - I won't post again in this list on the topic.
Personally, I think the present arrangement is the worst possible -- but then, I am as much entitled to express a view as anyone else.
Of course :) ... but _thankfully_ the list is not run "democratically" (meaning, in this context, an automatic referendum with one member one vote on technical matters such as the configuration of the listserver). (My initial "I vote for..." comment was intended to make that point, albeit obliquely...) Just to maximise off-topicity, and completely at a tangent: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/dec/23.htm
Among other things, the mere fact that the addressing arrangement differs from most other mailing lists on the planet speaks against it, from my _personal_ point of view.
I wonder if you apply the "I agree with the majority" approach in other areas. And re most other mailing lists: I'm not a member of many at the moment, but the five which I read all work the same way (in KMail at least) as suse-linux-e: Reply replies to the list, I have to hit "reply to author" to reply to the originator of the mail. None of those lists sets a Reply-to field (was that the original suggestion? I can't remember now :)
One of the great advantages of getting this forum as a newsgoup is that one sees it threaded.
Er, anyone using a mail client dating from the modern age can choose to do that too. This puzzled me though. If you see it as a newsgroup, surely your news client allows you to "followup to group" (i.e. send a reply to the list), or to "reply to sender". In that case, how does the current configuration cause you any problems? (you said you'd prefer the change: why?)
I don't have to evaluate each and every message for interest, for example, I can treat a whold thread as a unit.
On a forum as active as this one, which threatens to flood my mailbox with its traffic, this is a non-trivial advantage.
Er, of course it is. So filter the list in to its own folder so it doesn't obscure your other mail (and this is _not_ a high traffic mailing list, by the way). I'm thinking you haven't used a decent mail client, since most of the reasons you give for agreeing with the reply-to change (or for choosing to read the list in a ng) are only necessary to work around shortcomings which don't exist in any good mail program.
Posting through the newgroup is equally trouble free.
It's great that there are enough alternatives to suit nearly everyone.
Chacun a son gout Na vkus i na svet, tovarishchei nyet De gustibus non est disputandum 'Al ta'am ve'al reah., asur lehitvakeah. Different strokes for different folks
Well, that's fine as long as those whose taste is derived from a lower level of technical understanding are not allowed to reach a position of power which allows them to impose technically inferior solutions on those with more understanding of the matter in hand. That seems to be the case here at present, so all's well. -- Bill
On Friday 29 July 2005 01:50 pm, Stan Goodman wrote:
** Reply to message from jdd sur free <jdanield@free.fr> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:21:45 +0200
Fred A. Miller wrote:
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree.
+1 jdd
Which goes to show that there is no way to please everyone, and perhaps also that change is sometimes difficult to tolerate.
Personally, I think the present arrangement is the worst possible -- but then, I am as much entitled to express a view as anyone else. Among other things, the mere fact that the addressing arrangement differs from most other mailing lists on the planet speaks against it, from my _personal_ point of view.
There must be at least 6 different ways to solve the problem on your own even if your mailer doesn't support reply-to-list. Look around for one of them. I always just hit 'reply' to list emails just like I do for any other email. It *is* possible to fix.
One of the great advantages of getting this forum as a newsgoup is that one sees it threaded. I don't have to evaluate each and every message for interest, for example, I can treat a whold thread as a unit. On a forum as active as this one, which threatens to flood my mailbox with its traffic, this is a non-trivial advantage. Posting through the newgroup is equally trouble free.
It's great that there are enough alternatives to suit nearly everyone.
Chacun a son gout Na vkus i na svet, tovarishchei nyet De gustibus non est disputandum 'Al ta'am ve'al reah., asur lehitvakeah. Different strokes for different folks
-- Stan Goodman Qiryat Tiv'on Israel
"When your enemy falls, do not rejoice." -- Proverbs 24:17
On Friday, July 29, 2005 @ 3:27 AM Ken Schneider wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 12:26 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> writes:
Hello members,
In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her.
Basically here are my suggestions:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Andreas Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
I agree with Ken. What percent of the time to you reply to the sender? I think the default should be what is most common. I read the www.unicom.com document and wasn't convinced. Just my 2 cents worth. Greg Wallace
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 04:07 -0800, Greg Wallace wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2005 @ 3:27 AM Ken Schneider wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 12:26 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> writes:
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Andreas Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
I agree with Ken. What percent of the time to you reply to the sender? I think the default should be what is most common. I read the www.unicom.com document and wasn't convinced. Just my 2 cents worth.
Greg Wallace
And with more and more people using a web interface to their email the reply to list feature doesn't exist especially with gmail which is the worst. I think most people reply to the list over 90% of the time. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Friday 29 July 2005 06:20, Ken Schneider wrote:
And with more and more people using a web interface to their email the reply to list feature doesn't exist especially with gmail which is the worst. I think most people reply to the list over 90% of the time.
If you'd been in a badly administered list for a while and you were regularly flooded with "out-of-the-office" replies, you would know why... CFL --
On Friday 29 July 2005 14:20, Ken Schneider wrote:
And with more and more people using a web interface to their email the reply to list feature doesn't exist especially with gmail which is the worst.
This is a bug in gmail, it should be fixed there - not broken here.
I think most people reply to the list over 90% of the time.
Yes and your point is? I assume you mean that 100% of list members should be forced to reply to the list. BTW, I've heard good things about Evolution. It should be able to handle list mail properly, if setup properly. If you don't know how, start a new thread. -- Robert "roach" Spencer Pietermaritzburg South Africa
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 22:12 +0200, roach wrote:
On Friday 29 July 2005 14:20, Ken Schneider wrote:
And with more and more people using a web interface to their email the reply to list feature doesn't exist especially with gmail which is the worst.
This is a bug in gmail, it should be fixed there - not broken here.
I think most people reply to the list over 90% of the time.
Yes and your point is? I assume you mean that 100% of list members should be forced to reply to the list.
As opposed to being forced to reply to the sender as is now the case with a simple reply? And they would not be forced to any more than they are forced to reply to the list now.
BTW, I've heard good things about Evolution. It should be able to handle list mail properly, if setup properly. If you don't know how, start a new thread.
Yes it is which is why I use it. I just get tired of having to point out to people to only reply to the list when they reply to one of my posts. If they have a faulty email client they should learn that they can edit who the email goes to without to much trouble instead of being lazy and just using reply to all. Probably the same folks that hi-jack threads because they are to lazy to start a new thread. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Friday 29 July 2005 05:35 pm, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes it is which is why I use it. I just get tired of having to point out to people to only reply to the list when they reply to one of my posts. If they have a faulty email client they should learn that they can edit who the email goes to without to much trouble instead of being lazy and just using reply to all. Probably the same folks that hi-jack threads because they are to lazy to start a new thread.
Could you describe how you receive your email? Such as: Evolution pops it off my ISP Or you use fetchmail, etc.....
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 20:50 -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 29 July 2005 05:35 pm, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes it is which is why I use it. I just get tired of having to point out to people to only reply to the list when they reply to one of my posts. If they have a faulty email client they should learn that they can edit who the email goes to without to much trouble instead of being lazy and just using reply to all. Probably the same folks that hi-jack threads because they are to lazy to start a new thread.
Could you describe how you receive your email? Such as:
Evolution pops it off my ISP
Or you use fetchmail, etc.....
I have different accounts setup for different things, like this list. The address I use on this list is only used on this list and I set it up to use a Reply To: address of this list. This way when I start getting more spam to this address then I care to receive I remove the alias and setup a new one. I pop my email from my ISP as well as an internal server I use mainly for this list and to learn about postfix, being an old sendmail die hard. Before the upgrade to 9.3 evolution had the ability to right click in an email message and let me select "reply to list" but with the current version it is gone and now requires "ctrl l" in order to reply to list. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Friday 29 July 2005 14:07, Greg Wallace wrote:
I agree with Ken. What percent of the time to you reply to the sender? I think the default should be what is most common.
I read a book about deductive reasoning a few years ago. It had an example of faulty reasoning in it: "A Cow has 4 legs, a table has 4 legs, therefore a Cow is a table." You didn't think far enough before posting. "I think the default should be what is most common." Default OS on a new PC = WinXP Default email client = Outlook Express Default email style = HTML Default posting style = Top This list is called suse-linux-e *NOT* microsoft-windows-e, I prefer to be exceptional rather than common.
I read the www.unicom.com document and wasn't convinced. Just my 2 cents worth.
I read the www.unicom.com document and was convinced. Just my 5 cents worth. [1 & 2 cent pieces aren't legal tender here in S.A.] -- Robert "roach" Spencer Pietermaritzburg South Africa
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 07:27:17AM -0400, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 12:26 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> writes:
Hello members,
In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her.
Basically here are my suggestions:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Andreas Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
You seem to have managed heh. http://www.mutt.org
-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Friday 29 July 2005 4:27 am, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
I disagree, replying to the list is simple, at least with KMail, just press L and voila... Scott -- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.11.4-21.7-default x86_64 SuSE Linux 9.3 (x86-64)
On Friday 29 July 2005 4:27 am, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes, but the way it is setup now you cannot easily reply to the list which is where most of the replies should go.
I disagree, replying to the list is simple, at least with KMail, just press L and voila...
Scott Yes it is, but that is not the point I am trying to make. I use evolution which has a similar function. But there are many people on
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 18:12 -0700, Scott Leighton wrote: this list that have no "reply to list" available because they are using outlook probably at work because they are forced to. And what do they do, "Reply to All" and most of the time don't edit the To: or Cc: line to remove the individual address so that only the list address is left. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Friday 29 July 2005 7:14 pm, Ken Schneider wrote:
Yes it is, but that is not the point I am trying to make. I use evolution which has a similar function. But there are many people on this list that have no "reply to list" available because they are using outlook probably at work because they are forced to. And what do they do, "Reply to All" and most of the time don't edit the To: or Cc: line to remove the individual address so that only the list address is left.
Right, I see your point, but I view it more as a mail client defect rather than a list problem. Plus the list admin has already taken a position on the reply to issue, so when in rome... Scott -- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.11.4-21.7-default x86_64 SuSE Linux 9.3 (x86-64)
I disagree, replying to the list is simple, at least with KMail, just press L and voila...
I still like eudora for email i know its windows program but i been using it since back in 1993 an just love it for now. it does not have a reply to list funtion but i just use reply to all an then delete the list user an leave the list address in there. work for me for now. wish they would get eudora brought over to linux sure would be nice. jack
On Friday 29 July 2005 7:58 pm, Jack Malone wrote:
I disagree, replying to the list is simple, at least with KMail, just press L and voila...
I still like eudora for email i know its windows program but i been using it since back in 1993 an just love it for now. it does not have a reply to list funtion but i just use reply to all an then delete the list user an leave the list address in there. work for me for now. wish they would get eudora brought over to linux sure would be nice.
I too was a devoted Eudora fan for many many years, I still use it on one machine at work for internal mail (stuck with Outlook for real mail). I bit the bullet and made the switch at home to KMail and haven't regretted it. It's a bit painful at first to get used to KMail's UI, and to set up folders, etc. comparable to what I had with Eudora, but once past that initial stage, I've found it to be on par with Eudora. Scott -- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.11.4-21.7-default x86_64 SuSE Linux 9.3 (x86-64)
On Friday 29 July 2005 10:58 pm, Jack Malone wrote:
I disagree, replying to the list is simple, at least with KMail, just press L and voila...
I still like eudora for email i know its windows program but i been using it since back in 1993 an just love it for now. it does not have a reply to list funtion but i just use reply to all an then delete the list user an leave the list address in there. work for me for now. wish they would get eudora brought over to linux sure would be nice.
It had been considered sometime ago, however, I think with the advance of good free mailers, they now won't do it. There WAS some work being done to port Agent to Linux, but last I knew, that had stopped as well. Fred -- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft. We have no bugs in our software, Never! We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost to you, at this time.
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Reply-To is by many considered bad since you cannot easily reply offline, see for example:
And the opposite by others: http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-useful.html -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
Arun Khan wrote:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in [snip] I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
It is generally considered bad practice - see Andreas Jaegers reply.
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any
You could always read the list at gmane instead: news://gmane.org/gmane.linux.suse.general
c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At http://lists.suse.com/archive/ I did not see any search capability.
gmane has search capability. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/freetrial - managed anti-spam and anti-virus solution. Sign up for your free 30-day trial now!
On Friday 29 July 2005 06:20 am, Arun Khan wrote:
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Ah yes.... our semi-annual discourse on how the reply-to should be set. Which will go on ad-nauseum and SuSE will (and should) ignore totally. Please read the archives about Reply-to settings so we don't have to hash this over yet again. Thanks. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 07/29/05 09:46 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Bugs fly in through open Windows."
On 29 Jul 2005, knura@yahoo.com wrote:
When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever.
I see you are using Evolution. Doesn't Ctrl-L work for you? A quick Google search showed me that the "Reply To List" key binding have been there since Oct., 2003: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/evolution-patches/2003-October/003170.html
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list.
This I can agree with.
c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At http://lists.suse.com/archive/ I did not see any search capability.
You can search the SuSE lists with Google just fine. I have been doing it for many years. Charles -- "How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers are for. I only coded it." (Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting)
On Friday 29 July 2005 12:20, Arun Khan wrote: <...>
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com"
Yahoo mail is buggy, ask them to fix it. KMail respects: "list-post: <mailto:suse-linux-e@suse.com>"
All other lists that I am a member of use this feature.
I'm sorry to hear that you belong to some badly managed lists.
When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list.
No worries here, I happy with the status quo.
I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Because it's a stupid idea, why break the list manager here, because you have a crappy service there.
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list. Again, all other lists that I am a member of provide this feature. Personally, I prefer the digest since the messages downloaded are fewer. I am sure the mailer program for SuSE lists has the digest feature.
This is again a problem with Yahoo, not the list. Disadvantages of digest mode: - You keep on finding idiots on different list that post to the list with out changing the subject header. - digest mode breaks threads, kin of the above problem. - You get to keep all the spam. - No proper threading in the digest. Advantages of digest mode: - If you find it on the internet, you can use procmail to split it apart. :-) As you can see above, the disadvantages outway the advantages. Here in KMail, it makes a pleasant difference when I download separate list posts over 1 big digest email. My mail get separated into: - Business, personal and list post. - Spam and ham. - List post get divided into sub-categorise. - etc.
c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At http://lists.suse.com/archive/ I did not see any search capability.
Try gg:"search term" site:http://lists.suse.com/archive/ in konq.
Perhaps they will listen if enough people voice their opinion.
I certainly hope so, so far the vote is against you. BTW, it about time you start experiment with a *real* email client. Webmail just plain sucks. :-( -- Robert "roach" Spencer Pietermaritzburg South Africa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2005-07-29 at 15:50 +0530, Arun Khan wrote:
In the past couple of weeks I have sent a few suggestions to the list owner but have not received any feedback from him/her.
Basically here are my suggestions:
All of your questions are answered since ages ago on this list FAQ: that might be the reason you didn't get an answer from the owner. I'll just copy those Q&A from the FAQ for your convenience; please get the full FAQ yourself (easy: instructions for getting it are on about every email you receive from the list, and in the confirm message you got from the list server when you subscribed).
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in the messages sent to members e.g. for this list, it should be "Reply To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" All other lists that I am a member of use this feature. When members reply, they do not have to worry about editing the "To" header or right clicking in their message body or whatever. With this header the response _simply_ goes to the relevant SuSE list. I don't understand why SuSE list manager is not configured to do so.
Q2. Why do my replies go to the original poster and not the list? A2. We do not "munge" the mail headers by inserting a "Reply-To: suse-linux-e@suse.com" because it makes it more difficult subscribers to handle the mail the way they want to. Your mail client probably has a "reply" function as well as a "reply to all" or "reply to list" one; Please use the latter if you want you message to go to the list and not just to the original poster. Also, please don't complain about this on the list, it has been discussed many, many, many times in the past already. For background information see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html New! Even Sourceforge has turned to the dark side: http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6693&group_id=1
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list. Again, all other lists that I am a member of provide this feature. Personally, I prefer the digest since the messages downloaded are fewer. I am sure the mailer program for SuSE lists has the digest feature.
Q3. How to I get the list in digest form instead of separate emails? A3. We don't offer digested lists for several reasons: 1) Most of our lists (especially this one) are far to large to make digests useful. Are you really going to read an ~500K email once per day? Yes, it's the same amount that you would receive on as separate mail but it's easy to delete or skip messages that don't interest you in that case; it's not with a digest. 2) In our experience, digests tend to decrease the quality of list postings. They do this by encouraging the sorts of behaviors that are often considered rude or in poor 'netiquette': replying to mail with the incorrect subject header or other headers that make it impossible for threaded mail clients to work properly, replying to mail without reading the entire thread first, and probably more. Of course, people who do things like this are often the cause of huge flame wars about proper netiquette that can go on for days, often with the result of having very helpful and knowledgeable people leaving the list in disgust. 3) Usually, when people request digests what they are really asking for is a way to keep the list mail from flooding their mailbox and making it harder to find and read non-list mail. This is a valid concern and one that is best handled with mail filtering, not digests. If your system is configured to use procmail to deliver mail locally (SuSE's postfix and sendmail packages are) all you need to do is create a file in your home directory named '.procmailrc' that contains something like the following: MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail # where do you keep your mail? DEFAULT=$MAILDIR/inbox # what's you default mail box? # if mail is from list put it in $MAILDIR/foo :0 * ^X-Mailinglist::.*suse-linux-e $MAILDIR/foo Everything else will be placed in $DEFAULT. By default, procmail creates a normal mbox formatted mail box so if you want to copy the file somewhere (e.g., to a PDA) you only need to, in the above example, copy $MAILDIR/sle. Of course, procmail is capable of much more than what this simple example shows, so please read procmailrc(5) and procmailex(5) for more information.
c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At http://lists.suse.com/archive/ I did not see any search capability.
Q1. Why don't you provide searchable archives of this list? A1. The archives are far too large to be indexed by us. Very complete archives that are searchable can be found here: http://www.netsys.com/suse-linux-e/index.html http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/ Alternatively, you can prepend your search on Google.com with lists site:lists.suse.com E.g., to search for "lilo 1024" you would type lists site:lists.suse.com lilo 1024 into the search field.
Perhaps they will listen if enough people voice their opinion.
I don't think so ;-) - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFC6vQMtTMYHG2NR9URAtgiAJ4jjsI96qBp6QADqpGHz7MMIQxpEQCfU2Bu lbJaWlvDUIq2bAYY1WIyePQ= =RX+W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Whew, a lot of responses :) and I appreciate all your view points. Thanks to all who have pointed out helpful links and suggestions for MUAs. I could not follow up earlier, as the place where I am (Mumbai, India) is getting pummeled with unusually heavy rains and I needed to take care of a few urgent things. The rains have abetted a bit now. I am aware of KMail, Evolution (my MUA), other fine MUAs and their handling of mailing lists. I am also familiar with list/group searches in Google. A couple of events prompted me to start this discussion: 1) In the past few days, I have seen messages with "please respond to the list and not me." Apparently, a few members are hitting the "Reply" button and the messages are going to the sender i.s.o the list and hence the request to reconsider the "Reply To" header. 2) To convince a client (CEO of a real estate development group) that Linux has sufficient support, I was showing him the SuSE lists site. His comments were "Why doesn't this site provide a search capability? My local newspaper has a Google search box on it's home page." His remarks stumped me completely and hence the request for a Google box search capability on the lists.suse.com site. On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 05:29 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
All of your questions are answered since ages ago on this list FAQ: that might be the reason you didn't get an answer from the owner.
Thanks for pointing out the FAQ. As a small biz owner I have to wear many hats simultaneously, I admit that I did not get to the FAQ - but I have done so now :) Nonetheless, when someone takes the trouble to send an individual email, it is common courtesy to respond within a reasonable time. IMO, 15 days is reasonable. I believe that policies should be flexible and they should be revisited periodically for relevance and updated to incorporate new technology/trends. Interestingly, there is no mention, in the FAQ, on what type of posting (bottom or interleaved) members should adhere to; to trim quotes to only relevant portions that they are responding to. I see quite a few posts with the entire body of the previous message with their own 3-4 lines. A note on trimming messages to the relevant portions would certainly help. Here is a link with examples of types of posting: http://mailformat.dan.info/quoting/bottom-posting.html For further reading on Netiquette there is a RFC: http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
a) "Reply To" header - each SuSE list must use the "Reply To" header in
For background information see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
I am not 100% convinced with above and there are counter points as one member pointed to http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-useful.html IMO, this is a preference issue, rather than this is the right way and the other way is wrong/broken. I sincerely believe that list admins, who have chosen the opposite, are equally competent and have chosen it to address the needs of their customers. As another member posted, the list owner gets to choose per his/her preference and we get to live with the consequence of that choice. Neither method is without flaws. On this list, I have seen some members patching the issue at their own end by sticking "Reply To" in their postings or masquerading their own name with "suse-linux-e@suse.com" as the email address! Let us agree to disagree on this one :)
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any
Q3. How to I get the list in digest form instead of separate emails? A3. We don't offer digested lists for several reasons: 1) Most of our lists (especially this one) are far to large to make digests useful. Are you really going to read an ~500K email once per day? snip ...
Give me the freedom to choose between Individual or Digest mode. When I am on the road, I access my email @ Cyber Cafes or a loaner desktop at client location. In such instances, I find Digests more manageable.
2) In our experience, digests tend to decrease the quality of list postings. They do this by encouraging the sorts of behaviors that are often considered rude or in poor 'netiquette': replying to mail with the incorrect subject
snip ... This can happen with individual messages as well, when people "recycle" a message and break the thread or respond to a mid stream message w/o having seen all the messages in the thread.
3) Usually, when people request digests what they are really asking for is a way to keep the list mail from flooding their mailbox and making it harder to find and read non-list mail. This is a valid concern and one that is best handled with mail filtering, not digests.
snip ... But Digest is supported by ezmlm. Why have me reinvent the wheel at my end with procmail?
c) Google search bar for each of SuSE list archives. At
Q1. Why don't you provide searchable archives of this list?
A1. The archives are far too large to be indexed by us. Very complete archives that are searchable can be found here: http://www.netsys.com/suse-linux-e/index.html
IMO, from a Marketing/Sales/CRM perspective, this answer creates a bad image, especially with decision makers. The message I get from it: A company like Novell, does not have the resource to do it (hardware, software, etc.), that it relies on an independent third party site to provide search functionality with no assurance of availability. For the past 36 hours, I have not been able to connect to the netsys site. The user gets a bad impression when you point to an independent 3rd party site and it is offline for an extended period. IMO, even if the archive searches were to be outsourced, it would look more professional under a suse.com domain name or a Google search box on the "lists" site. Had I known about this site and shown it to my CEO client, it would have been very embarrassing.
This site is on line. It is functional but the presentation can be improved for better readability. My above comment about independent 3rd party site applies.
Alternatively, you can prepend your search on Google.com with lists site:lists.suse.com
Yes, but I think putting a Google search box on the lists.suse.com is a cleaner alternative and more importantly creates better customer image. The above are my opinions/preferences. From the responses on this thread, I am sure many may differ with me. Let us agree to disagree; I shall not post further on this particular thread. Thank you. -- Arun Khan <knura@yahoo.com> Unix user 1984, Linux user/admin 1994
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 15:50 +0530, Arun Khan wrote:
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list.
One thing not clear to me is what is different about the SUSE community that makes digest mode inappropriate here. Thanks, Mike
MJang wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 15:50 +0530, Arun Khan wrote:
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list.
One thing not clear to me is what is different about the SUSE community that makes digest mode inappropriate here.
Thanks, Mike
Ah, pity you stopped reading the FAQ at Q2. Because this issue is addressed in Q3: Q3. How to I get the list in digest form instead of separate emails? Read the bottom of this (in fact all) mails to see where to obtain the FAQ. Regards, -- Jos van Kan www.josvankan.tk
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 17:36 +0200, Jos van Kan wrote:
MJang wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 15:50 +0530, Arun Khan wrote:
b) Digest mode - provide a digest option when member subscribes to any of SuSE's list.
One thing not clear to me is what is different about the SUSE community that makes digest mode inappropriate here.
Ah, pity you stopped reading the FAQ at Q2. Because this issue is addressed in Q3:
Q3. How to I get the list in digest form instead of separate emails?
Dear Jos, I have read it. None of it addresses my specific question. The answer in the FAQ is all just a general rationale. To rephrase: What is it about the SUSE community that makes SUSE come to a different conclusion about digests? Thanks, Mike
On Sunday 31 July 2005 18:00, MJang wrote:
I have read it. None of it addresses my specific question. The answer in the FAQ is all just a general rationale.
No, it is very specific to this list
To rephrase: What is it about the SUSE community that makes SUSE come to a different conclusion about digests?
Why do you want a digest? Would you really go through a 500K+ email per day? Are you really not just looking for a way to filter the list mail?
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 18:29 +0200, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 31 July 2005 18:00, MJang wrote:
I have read it. None of it addresses my specific question. The answer in the FAQ is all just a general rationale.
No, it is very specific to this list
To rephrase: What is it about the SUSE community that makes SUSE come to a different conclusion about digests?
Why do you want a digest? Would you really go through a 500K+ email per day? Are you really not just looking for a way to filter the list mail?
Nope. I have no problem with SUSE's decision. I do not need a digest. I'm just looking to understand what is different about SUSE people that leads to a different conclusion about digests /w/r/t Fedora or Debian people. Thanks, Mike
On Sunday 31 July 2005 9:35 am, MJang wrote:
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 18:29 +0200, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 31 July 2005 18:00, MJang wrote:
I have read it. None of it addresses my specific question. The answer in the FAQ is all just a general rationale.
No, it is very specific to this list
To rephrase: What is it about the SUSE community that makes SUSE come to a different conclusion about digests?
Why do you want a digest? Would you really go through a 500K+ email per day? Are you really not just looking for a way to filter the list mail?
Nope. I have no problem with SUSE's decision. I do not need a digest. I'm just looking to understand what is different about SUSE people that leads to a different conclusion about digests /w/r/t Fedora or Debian people.
Well, the FAQ is abundantly clear on the subject. It explains the complete rationale. As to comparisions with Fedora or Debian mail lists, that's apples and oranges given that they all have different list administrators and the list administrator gets to make these kinds of decisions. Scott -- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.11.4-21.7-default x86_64 SuSE Linux 9.3 (x86-64)
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 14:27 -0700, Scott Leighton wrote:
On Sunday 31 July 2005 9:35 am, MJang wrote:
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 18:29 +0200, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 31 July 2005 18:00, MJang wrote:
I have read it. None of it addresses my specific question. The answer in the FAQ is all just a general rationale.
No, it is very specific to this list
To rephrase: What is it about the SUSE community that makes SUSE come to a different conclusion about digests?
Why do you want a digest? Would you really go through a 500K+ email per day? Are you really not just looking for a way to filter the list mail?
Nope. I have no problem with SUSE's decision. I do not need a digest. I'm just looking to understand what is different about SUSE people that leads to a different conclusion about digests /w/r/t Fedora or Debian people.
Dear Scott,
Please show me where. I've re-read the FAQ again. I see nothing w/r/t any analysis in comparison to Fedora or Debian lists.
As to comparisions with Fedora or Debian mail lists, that's apples and oranges given that they all have different list administrators and the list administrator gets to make these kinds of decisions.
And on each list, the decision seems to have popular support. What is different about each community? I think it's more than just the arbitrary decisions of a list manager. I suspect it's related to the European bent of the SUSE list membership, but I think that's too simplistic.
I think the reason why people here seem to have trouble answering the question is that it's more sociological in nature. Yes, a bit OT, but who better to understand the differences between Linux users than Linux users?
Thanks, Mike
participants (23)
-
Allen -
Anders Johansson -
Andreas Jaeger -
Arun Khan -
Bruce Marshall -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos F Lange -
Charles philip Chan -
Felix Miata -
Fred A. Miller -
Greg Wallace -
Jack Malone -
jdd sur free -
Jos van Kan -
Ken Schneider -
MJang -
notvalid＠not-a-domain.com -
Per Jessen -
Peter M. Groen -
roach -
Scott Leighton -
Stan Goodman -
William Gallafent