On Friday 21 September 2001 19:51 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 15:24, you wrote:
[snip]
To whom that applies
When replying to a mail please _DO_NOT CC to the person. As this person is on the list also you are just increasing bandwith usage for both sides. Since the only way you can send an email to any SuSE mailling Lists is only if the person is subscribed what is the benefit of CC'ing to the others who tried to provide an answer unless the original email sender has requested to be CC'ed.
Here's the problem (mail-client-specific - in my case, Kmail):
Like many of you, I subscribe to 2 Linux mail lists; the SuSE list and the generic list Doug hosts. If I want to reply to something on the linux-users list, I click the 'reply' icon. If I do the same thing on the SuSE list, the reply goes to the *author* and not the list, so then I must open the address book, find the address for the SuSE list, click on it, and then delete the author's address.
"Big deal!" you say. But it is a royal PIA from where I sit. If I remember, (*if*) I can click the 'reply ALL' icon and then remember to delete the extra address. It would be great if they both worked the same way - but they don't.
My 2 kopecks...
Regards
(so why did you send this to the linux.nf list??) But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place. (but of couse, they don't care) -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/21/01 21:27 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Ninety-eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. It's the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity. But then, we elected them." --Lily Tomlin
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:29:11PM -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 19:51 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 15:24, you wrote:
[snip]
To whom that applies
When replying to a mail please _DO_NOT CC to the person. As this person is on the list also you are just increasing bandwith usage for both sides. Since the only way you can send an email to any SuSE mailling Lists is only if the person is subscribed what is the benefit of CC'ing to the others who tried to provide an answer unless the original email sender has requested to be CC'ed.
Here's the problem (mail-client-specific - in my case, Kmail):
Like many of you, I subscribe to 2 Linux mail lists; the SuSE list and the generic list Doug hosts. If I want to reply to something on the linux-users list, I click the 'reply' icon. If I do the same thing on the SuSE list, the reply goes to the *author* and not the list, so then I must open the address book, find the address for the SuSE list, click on it, and then delete the author's address.
"Big deal!" you say. But it is a royal PIA from where I sit. If I remember, (*if*) I can click the 'reply ALL' icon and then remember to delete the extra address. It would be great if they both worked the same way - but they don't.
My 2 kopecks...
Regards
(so why did you send this to the linux.nf list??)
But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by ^^^^^^^^^^^
English is not my first language. But according to the dictionary (I looked into Longman), "every other" means "the first, third, fifth etc or the second forth, sixth etc of things that can be counted" Did you really mean that half of the lists you joined works? ;-)
just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place.
If you look at the full headers of the messages from SLE you'll find a line X-Mailinglist: suse-linux-e And it's only a matter of MUA configuration to process this line properly. mutt has no problems with that. I am not an expert neither in KMail, nor in Netscape/Mozilla. Maybe someone else knows how to configure mailing lists in graphical MUAs. -Kastus
(but of couse, they don't care)
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/21/01 21:27 +
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 07:38:44PM -0700, Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka wrote:
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:29:11PM -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 19:51 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 15:24, you wrote:
[snip]
Mmm. Mutt has special facilities for dealing with mailing lists (and for most everything else !). I would recommend it. I use to use mutt and kmail at different times, but I took a bit of time to learn mutt and ask a few questions and I use it now exclusively. Kmail is still at a fairly primitive stage, and has some weird design decisions built into it (it's idea of how to re-draw your index when you delete several messages in a row is bizarre to say the least). I find the combination of mutt/procmail/postfix to be an excellent one. Slightly OT, but... -- Regards Cliff
I am not an expert in mail clients too (neither in English language). I do not participate in many lists, too. Maybe because of that, I had problems with posting/replying to this list. But, then, there are (maybe) other reasons. I mostly use Netscape as mail client and here is some of my experience with it and the S.u.S.E list: 1. hit on "reply" button produces a "to" msg to original poster only 2. button "reply all" makes a "to" msg to the poster and a "cc" to list. If then I delete "to" field and edit "cc" field (change it to "to") then I do not cause duplicates. If I leave it like my mailer "proposes", than it causes "doubles" in the list. 3. a direct msg "to" list (starting new thread) I can do only when I click on "list-post" link in some earlier msg header (view/headers/full). There may exist another way (other than direct typing in address field), but I did not figure it out yet. 4. I never played with "forward" button :-) When comparing to other lists I've seen, this behavior is litlle too complicated. Most of the other lists' headers are set up so that hitting "reply" is exactly what one expects - i.e. reply to the list. Or it is just an e-mailer issue? Best regards rms "Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka" wrote:
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 09:29:11PM -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 19:51 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 15:24, you wrote:
[snip]
To whom that applies
When replying to a mail please _DO_NOT CC to the person. As this person is on the list also you are just increasing bandwith usage for both sides. Since the only way you can send an email to any SuSE mailling Lists is only if the person is subscribed what is the benefit of CC'ing to the others who tried to provide an answer unless the original email sender has requested to be CC'ed.
Here's the problem (mail-client-specific - in my case, Kmail):
Like many of you, I subscribe to 2 Linux mail lists; the SuSE list and the generic list Doug hosts. If I want to reply to something on the linux-users list, I click the 'reply' icon. If I do the same thing on the SuSE list, the reply goes to the *author* and not the list, so then I must open the address book, find the address for the SuSE list, click on it, and then delete the author's address.
"Big deal!" you say. But it is a royal PIA from where I sit. If I remember, (*if*) I can click the 'reply ALL' icon and then remember to delete the extra address. It would be great if they both worked the same way - but they don't.
My 2 kopecks...
Regards
(so why did you send this to the linux.nf list??)
But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by ^^^^^^^^^^^
English is not my first language. But according to the dictionary (I looked into Longman), "every other" means "the first, third, fifth etc or the second forth, sixth etc of things that can be counted"
Did you really mean that half of the lists you joined works? ;-)
just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place.
If you look at the full headers of the messages from SLE you'll find a line
X-Mailinglist: suse-linux-e
And it's only a matter of MUA configuration to process this line properly. mutt has no problems with that. I am not an expert neither in KMail, nor in Netscape/Mozilla. Maybe someone else knows how to configure mailing lists in graphical MUAs.
-Kastus
(but of couse, they don't care)
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/21/01 21:27 +
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
I got it from the list so when I hit "reply" I want it to go to the list. that is all
On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:39, you wrote:
I got it from the list so when I hit "reply" I want it to go to the list.
that is all
I don't haven't been following the entire thread here, so this may have been previously explained. The reason the reply goes to the originator and not the list is because a long time ago some network vandal repeatedly set up an automatic reflector which caused messages posted to SLE to be responded to. By changing the "reply to" field to the originator, SuSE prevented that from happening. There are perhaps more sophisticated methods to solve that problem. I too find the current configuration to be awkward, but I understand why things are the way they are. I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature. Steven -- Open Source Software depends on your support. If you use it, be sure to give something back. http://www.suse.com | http://www.kde.org http://www.mozilla.org | http://www.xemacs.org
On Saturday 22 September 2001 05:32 pm, Steven Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
You *can* right click on the list address and choose "Send reply to.." This is what I do. -- Bob Rea Fear of Hell is pernicious; So is fear of Heaven. sfpetard@earthlink.net home.earthlink.net/~rear
On Saturday 22 September 2001 21:12 pm, Bob Rea wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
You *can* right click on the list address and choose "Send reply to.." This is what I do.
Well yeah, but you probably read the docs too.... :o) damn nice feechur. Thanks.. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/22/01 22:58 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "The slower you drive, the farther you get. -- Russian proverb"
On Saturday 22 September 2001 06:12 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 05:32 pm, Steven Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
You *can* right click on the list address and choose "Send reply to.." This is what I do.
COOL! thanks
On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:12, you wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 05:32 pm, Steven Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
You *can* right click on the list address and choose "Send reply to.." This is what I do.
Wow! I didn't know that. That's cool. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Glenn -- Glenn Williams - n0hn@abq-nm.com Registered Linux User #135678 Powered by SuSE 7.2 Linux Professional
On Saturday 22 September 2001 20:32 pm, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
I think the best way to handle this... and I think I will suggest it to the Kmail developers, is to handle it like my favorite email client did. When hitting reply to an email with a different reply to, it would pop up a dialog box asking you to check which address you wanted to reply to. It was simple just to select one or the other (list or sender) and you had the capability of doing either. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/22/01 22:52 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Ever stop to think, and forget to start again?"
In KMail (2.1.2) Don't know about later versions though... Hit 'L' -reply goes to list :) Check the 'Message' Menu...
From 'Help':
Message->Reply List... (L) Opens up the Composer with the To: field set to the mailing list address. Of course this will only work if you configured the current folder to be associated with a mailing list. Otherwise the To: field will be empty. Regards Jon Clausen On Sunday 23 September 2001 04:55, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 20:32 pm, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
I think the best way to handle this... and I think I will suggest it to the Kmail developers, is to handle it like my favorite email client did.
When hitting reply to an email with a different reply to, it would pop up a dialog box asking you to check which address you wanted to reply to. It was simple just to select one or the other (list or sender) and you had the capability of doing either.
The only problem with that is that it sends the reply to both the list and to the original poster. I always thought this a rather annoying behavior since then the poster winds up with two copies of the reply. Anyone know a way to adjust that behavior? Bernie w1az@arrl.net On Sunday 23 September 2001 05:54, Jon Clausen wrote:
In KMail (2.1.2) Don't know about later versions though...
Hit 'L' -reply goes to list :)
Check the 'Message' Menu...
From 'Help':
Message->Reply List... (L)
Opens up the Composer with the To: field set to the mailing list address. Of course this will only work if you configured the current folder to be associated with a mailing list. Otherwise the To: field will be empty.
Regards Jon Clausen
On Sunday 23 September 2001 04:55, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 20:32 pm, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
I think the best way to handle this... and I think I will suggest it to the Kmail developers, is to handle it like my favorite email client did.
When hitting reply to an email with a different reply to, it would pop up a dialog box asking you to check which address you wanted to reply to. It was simple just to select one or the other (list or sender) and you had the capability of doing either.
Well not from here, anyways... I don't know that I did anything other than install, and make a folder for the list... This message is made like that. Just one keystroke... Do you have the folder associated with the list? Regards Jon Clausen On Sunday 23 September 2001 13:59, Bernie Gardner wrote:
The only problem with that is that it sends the reply to both the list and to the original poster. I always thought this a rather annoying behavior since then the poster winds up with two copies of the reply. Anyone know a way to adjust that behavior?
Bernie w1az@arrl.net
On Sunday 23 September 2001 05:54, Jon Clausen wrote:
In KMail (2.1.2) Don't know about later versions though...
Hit 'L' -reply goes to list :)
Check the 'Message' Menu...
From 'Help':
Message->Reply List... (L)
Opens up the Composer with the To: field set to the mailing list address. Of course this will only work if you configured the current folder to be associated with a mailing list. Otherwise the To: field will be empty.
Regards Jon Clausen
On Sunday 23 September 2001 04:55, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 20:32 pm, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
I think the best way to handle this... and I think I will suggest it to the Kmail developers, is to handle it like my favorite email client did.
When hitting reply to an email with a different reply to, it would pop up a dialog box asking you to check which address you wanted to reply to. It was simple just to select one or the other (list or sender) and you had the capability of doing either.
Just a thought, but wouldn't it be better to make changes at the *end* of the subject? That way, when you sort by subject, the topics are still together. This change put the message in a completely different place. Since that is the way they are better sorted and it helps ensure people do not give the same response as someone else, keeping the beginning of the subject line makes better sense to me. regards, jimmo Steven T. Hatton wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:39, you wrote:
I got it from the list so when I hit "reply" I want it to go to the list.
that is all
I don't haven't been following the entire thread here, so this may have been previously explained. The reason the reply goes to the originator and not the list is because a long time ago some network vandal repeatedly set up an automatic reflector which caused messages posted to SLE to be responded to. By changing the "reply to" field to the originator, SuSE prevented that from happening. There are perhaps more sophisticated methods to solve that problem. I too find the current configuration to be awkward, but I understand why things are the way they are.
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
Steven
I noticed someone mentioned configuring mutt to automatically reply to the list. I don't use mutt, and I don't have time to learn to configure a new application. I use KMail. It would be nice if KMail supported such a feature.
I guess most people set up a rule to redirect mail from a list to a new folder, at least I do. In that folder it is possible to specify a list email address. When you want to "reply to list" you then can press "L" for reply to list. To "reply to sender" you can press "R". /Stefan
On Saturday 22 September 2001 1:29 am, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 19:51 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Friday 21 September 2001 15:24, you wrote:
[snip]
To whom that applies
When replying to a mail please _DO_NOT CC to the person. As this person is on the list also you are just increasing bandwith usage for both sides. Since the only way you can send an email to any SuSE mailling Lists is only if the person is subscribed what is the benefit of CC'ing to the others who tried to provide an answer unless the original email sender has requested to be CC'ed.
Here's the problem (mail-client-specific - in my case, Kmail):
Like many of you, I subscribe to 2 Linux mail lists; the SuSE list and the generic list Doug hosts. If I want to reply to something on the linux-users list, I click the 'reply' icon. If I do the same thing on the SuSE list, the reply goes to the *author* and not the list, so then I must open the address book, find the address for the SuSE list, click on it, and then delete the author's address.
"Big deal!" you say. But it is a royal PIA from where I sit. If I remember, (*if*) I can click the 'reply ALL' icon and then remember to delete the extra address. It would be great if they both worked the same way - but they don't.
My 2 kopecks...
Regards
(so why did you send this to the linux.nf list??)
But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place.
(but of couse, they don't care)
Isn't his getting a little out of hand? Is it such a deal to hit the "reply to all" button or amend the recipient list manually? And to talk of wasted bandwidth is just a little OTT; how many are subscribed to the list? And, what difference is another message or two per thread going to make? Let's get real, there are more important things than imposing stupid ideals on one another! M
On Saturday 22 September 2001 04:40, Martin Webster wrote:
Isn't his getting a little out of hand? Is it such a deal to hit the "reply to all" button or amend the recipient list manually? And to talk of wasted bandwidth is just a little OTT; how many are subscribed to the list? And, what difference is another message or two per thread going to make? Let's get real, there are more important things than imposing stupid ideals on one another!
M
Your comments noted. I guess it is time for me to revert to lurking, or perhaps just unsub from this list. It is very likely than any further queries I would post would convey or attempt to impose my "stupid ideals" on others, or comment on other things not important enough to justify use of the bandwidth. -- Glenn Williams - n0hn@abq-nm.com Registered Linux User #135678 Powered by SuSE 7.2 Linux Professional
On Sunday 23 September 2001 4:00 pm, Glenn Williams wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 04:40, Martin Webster wrote:
Isn't his getting a little out of hand? Is it such a deal to hit the "reply to all" button or amend the recipient list manually? And to talk of wasted bandwidth is just a little OTT; how many are subscribed to the list? And, what difference is another message or two per thread going to make? Let's get real, there are more important things than imposing stupid ideals on one another!
M
Your comments noted.
I guess it is time for me to revert to lurking, or perhaps just unsub from this list. It is very likely than any further queries I would post would convey or attempt to impose my "stupid ideals" on others, or comment on other things not important enough to justify use of the bandwidth.
Glenn, I would hate to see you leave the list. Perhaps I didn't express myself very well? What I was trying to say was that this debate has gone far enough and that in the original post Togan Muftuoglu made a ridiculous comment about bandwidth, i.e. one duplicated message in many hundreds sent is a waste of valuable bandwidth. I don't think anyone should have to justify sending a question to this list. And when we do we should be able to experience freedom from constaint whilst not imposing on one anothers rights. Since some more recent posts have suggested a number of pragmatic ways to satisfy (almost) all - pressing "L" in KMail works for me - can this thread 'gently' die now? M
Hi, Hope you don't mind I removed all quotings. This isn't a reply to one of the messages in particular but to this thread in general. Hasn't this been going on for long enough now? I have only one thing to say to all this: Mailing lists do not send messages. The subscribers do, or rather the e-mail clients they use. If your reply should go to the list only, then send it to the list only. Take it easy, Tim
On Sunday 23 September 2001 14:10, Martin Webster wrote: <snip>
Since some more recent posts have suggested a number of pragmatic ways to satisfy (almost) all - pressing "L" in Kmail works for me - can this thread 'gently' die now?
M
More FUD and from an apparent Linux geek. :) Pressing "L" does nothing in my version of Kmail . . . however pressing "l" produces favorable results. Please pay attention to case. :) -- Best Rgs., Ed
On September 23, 2001 07:08 pm, Edward Beatty wrote:
On Sunday 23 September 2001 14:10, Martin Webster wrote: <snip>
Since some more recent posts have suggested a number of pragmatic ways to satisfy (almost) all - pressing "L" in Kmail works for me - can this thread 'gently' die now?
M
More FUD and from an apparent Linux geek. :)
Pressing "L" does nothing in my version of Kmail . . . however pressing "l" produces favorable results.
For me it's the reverse. Ph33r my first 'L' reply to the list. I didn't know Kmail had that feature. Now if only I could edit my right-click menu... -- James Oakley Engineering - SolutionInc Ltd. joakley@solutioninc.com http://www.solutioninc.com
On Sunday 23 September 2001 10:08 pm, Edward Beatty wrote:
On Sunday 23 September 2001 14:10, Martin Webster wrote: <snip>
Since some more recent posts have suggested a number of pragmatic ways to satisfy (almost) all - pressing "L" in Kmail works for me - can this thread 'gently' die now?
M
More FUD and from an apparent Linux geek. :)
Pressing "L" does nothing in my version of Kmail . . . however pressing "l" produces favorable results.
Please pay attention to case. :)
It's offical, I'm a geek at last! Yep, I just pressed the twelth letter of the alphabet (it says "L" on the key). But if you want to be pedantic it's "l" (not "I", the ninth letter). Oh please, get a life! ;-) M
I'm with Bruce! The logical thing is that replies go to the **list** and not to individuals. Most everyone I know who wants to reply wants to reply to the list so that everyone sees the answer. If you want 1:1 communication, you use email. If you want m:n, you use mailing lists or newsgroups. I find it extremely annoying to have to hit "reply all". And no, it is not getting out of hand. It's annoying, just like having to reboot with every little changes in Windows. Yes, we can ignore the fact that it makes no sense and continue to be annoyed, or we can express our opinion and if enough people want it changed, it get's changed. That's what democracy and Linux are all about. Regards, jimmo Bruce Marshall wrote:
But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place.
(but of couse, they don't care)
Op zaterdag 22 september 2001 14:31, schreef James Mohr:
And no, it is not getting out of hand. It's annoying, just like having to reboot with every little changes in Windows. Yes, we can ignore the fact that it makes no sense and continue to be annoyed, or we can express our opinion and if enough people want it changed, it get's changed. That's what democracy and Linux are all about.
I want to have it change too. This is the only mailinglist that I'm subscribed to, that sends it reply not to the list. (I'm subscribed to quite a lot of mailinglists). -- Richard Bos For those who have no home the journey is endless
On Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 03:38:22PM +0200, Richard Bos wrote:
Op zaterdag 22 september 2001 14:31, schreef James Mohr:
And no, it is not getting out of hand. It's annoying, just like having to reboot with every little changes in Windows. Yes, we can ignore the fact that it makes no sense and continue to be annoyed, or we can express our opinion and if enough people want it changed, it get's changed. That's what democracy and Linux are all about.
I want to have it change too. This is the only mailinglist that I'm subscribed to, that sends it reply not to the list. (I'm subscribed to quite a lot of mailinglists).
I actually find this discussion more annoying than having to diddle
with the To: address. However, I did take the time to learn how to
configure Mutt to handle lists, and after just two minutes I could add
the following lines to my .muttrc
lists suse-linux-e bugtraq suse-security postfix-users kde-users cert
subscribe suse-linux-e suse-security
And by pressing "L" to reply to list, I don't bother diddling
anymore. I believe the following values are default, but if not you
might also want to add them to your .muttrc:
set followup_to
set honor_followup_to
Regards,
Corvin
--
Corvin Russell
Well, let's see... In most email programs you see the subject before you open the message, so it's pretty easy to figure out that any message in the next few days or so that has the subject "[SLE] A gentle request" is about this topic. All you need to do is *not* read it. However, every singe message we want to reply to has this problem. Hmmmm. Sounds like the proportions are waaaaay off here. The bottom line is, if this thread bothers you, don't read it! As for using mutt, this isn't Windows we're dealing with. Linux is a matter of choice. If I am *forced* to use a particular program because a mailing list is not set up logically, then there is really no choice is there? I am either forced to use that program, forced to deal with the illogical configuration or forced to drop the list. There is little, if no, benefit from configuring the list to reply just to the individual. The **greater** benefit is in replying to the list. So logically.... Regards, jimmo Corvin Russell wrote:
On Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 03:38:22PM +0200, Richard Bos wrote:
Op zaterdag 22 september 2001 14:31, schreef James Mohr:
And no, it is not getting out of hand. It's annoying, just like having to reboot with every little changes in Windows. Yes, we can ignore the fact that it makes no sense and continue to be annoyed, or we can express our opinion and if enough people want it changed, it get's changed. That's what democracy and Linux are all about.
I want to have it change too. This is the only mailinglist that I'm subscribed to, that sends it reply not to the list. (I'm subscribed to quite a lot of mailinglists).
I actually find this discussion more annoying than having to diddle with the To: address. However, I did take the time to learn how to configure Mutt to handle lists, and after just two minutes I could add the following lines to my .muttrc
lists suse-linux-e bugtraq suse-security postfix-users kde-users cert subscribe suse-linux-e suse-security
And by pressing "L" to reply to list, I don't bother diddling anymore. I believe the following values are default, but if not you might also want to add them to your .muttrc:
set followup_to set honor_followup_to
Regards,
Corvin
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 11:54:16AM +0200, James Mohr wrote:
As for using mutt, this isn't Windows we're dealing with. Linux is a matter of choice. If I am *forced* to use a particular program because a mailing list is not set up logically, then there is really no choice is there? I am either forced to use that program, forced to deal with the illogical configuration or forced to drop the list. There is little, if no, benefit from configuring the list to reply just to the individual. The **greater** benefit is in replying to the list. So logically....
Regards,
jimmo
Jimmo, my point was not that you should use Mutt, but that in two
minutes I found an acceptable solution to the problem (and posted it
to list). Now it appears that there are at least two solutions in
KMail and I am sure elsewhere too.
Regards,
Corvin
--
Corvin Russell
What's more, SuSE is not about to change this. The issue comes up
every six months here and on suse-security and the answer is always
the same. So far no one has suggested a solution which satisfies both
their own concern AND the concerns of SuSE which have been outlined
here. When someone comes up with such a solution, perhaps it
can be implemented. Until someone does, I don't think there will be
changes.
Regards,
Corvin
--
Corvin Russell
I just think that we should leave the list the way it is and just hit "reply all" and then remove the senders name and just send to the list. I don't have no problem with how the list works, just don't want duplicate E-mails. I doubt SuSE is going to change their ways because, to my knowledge it is a security concern and im willing to stand beside that fact and just remove the senders name from the "To:" field. On Saturday 22 September 2001 08:31 am, James Mohr wrote:
I'm with Bruce!
The logical thing is that replies go to the **list** and not to individuals. Most everyone I know who wants to reply wants to reply to the list so that everyone sees the answer. If you want 1:1 communication, you use email. If you want m:n, you use mailing lists or newsgroups. I find it extremely annoying to have to hit "reply all".
And no, it is not getting out of hand. It's annoying, just like having to reboot with every little changes in Windows. Yes, we can ignore the fact that it makes no sense and continue to be annoyed, or we can express our opinion and if enough people want it changed, it get's changed. That's what democracy and Linux are all about.
Regards,
jimmo
Bruce Marshall wrote:
But I agree with you 100%. Every other list I have *ever* joined works by just hitting 'reply', but some of the S.O.B.'s on the SuSE list think that their way is the 'pure' way. And I think I'm going to drop that list just because of it. More because of the attitude than having to spend the time to make sure the mail goes to the right place.
(but of couse, they don't care)
-- David M. AIM: dmcglone27 ICQ: 96210352
On Saturday 22 September 2001 5:42 pm, David McGlone wrote:
I just think that we should leave the list the way it is and just hit "reply all" and then remove the senders name and just send to the list. I don't have no problem with how the list works, just don't want duplicate E-mails. I doubt SuSE is going to change their ways because, to my knowledge it is a security concern and im willing to stand beside that fact and just remove the senders name from the "To:" field.
Feel free to do what you wish. If it's less hassle to edit the "To:" field than it is to delete a duplicated message then go ahead . However, don't expect everyone else to follow suit. Maybe this will bring an end of the subject. At least for another six months anyway! ;-) M
An end? Well, maybe not, Martin. But I will now attempt to put this
thread so far out that it will die a most horrible death.
Most of the Lists I belong to are set up so that reply goes directly to
the list. From where I sit, there are good things and bad things about
it. Most of the time, I don't have to give much thought to what I'm
doing, and off goes the response. However, sometimes I think I'm talking
to just one person on the list, and I find it's gone to everyone : see
lots of messages like that, followed up by abject apologies. Can be
embarrassing. Some lists are set up like this one ; on the whole, these
lists are run by and for computer people. Historians, sociologists,
anthropologists or linguists do it the friendly, obvious way. Geeks do
it *this* way (am I allowed to use the term 'geek', or is it considered
abusive?)
Way I look at it is, you guys probably know what you're doing when it
comes to matters practico-technical (matters metaphorical is something
else : the guy who wrote that stuff about cathedrals and bazaars knows
nothing about either of them, and I'd have him shut away for two weeks
with Duby and Braudel - Gates is all about Bazaars, and fixing prices).
So you've got this list rigged the way you like it, and that's okay by
me.
In any case, most mail software makes it pretty simple to deal with.
Eudora lets you get at the addresses you're sending to directly, Becky
gives you a 'selected addresses' button, and the Bat gives you a whole
set of tools which will help. (I'm still in Windows here, until I can
get this damned thing installed).
But in the end, the whole question is going to go away : I have an ADSL
permanent connection. Most of the lists I'm on, I now set to NOMAIL, and
go check the archives whenever I feel like it. If I want to contribute,
I've got the list address in my address book - means you have to type in
the Subject bit, but so what? Leaves my mail-box uncluttered, ready for
the personal messages that I really like to receive. It's a long time
since the day when I had 56K, dial-up-and-pay service, and someone on a
funky music list (for my son - my own tastes run to Ligeti and the
Magnetic Fields) sent the whole web-site for the Ohio Players. Now, he
did get a flame.
Best wishes
--
Timothy Mason
I've sort of been hitting the delete key on this thread but as one respondent said: "Just edit the To: line so that the reply goes to the list and not to the sender... No Rocket science here!
On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:55 pm, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I've sort of been hitting the delete key on this thread but as one respondent said: "Just edit the To: line so that the reply goes to the list and not to the sender... No Rocket science here!
Pain in the ass though.... and when you belong to 3 or 4 lists, its a pain to have to check everything out as to whether you have to do that additional editing step or just a simple reply. I *REALLY* don't see why people are opposed to having email go back to the list. I don't think it is a the big 'munging' issue that people want to make it. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/22/01 22:46 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine"
* Bruce Marshall (bmarsh@bmarsh.com) [010922 19:50]:
->On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:55 pm, Clint Tinsley wrote:
->> I've sort of been hitting the delete key on this thread but as one
->> respondent said: "Just edit the To: line so that the reply goes to the
->> list and not to the sender... No Rocket science here!
->
->Pain in the ass though.... and when you belong to 3 or 4 lists, its a pain
->to have to check everything out as to whether you have to do that additional
->editing step or just a simple reply.
->
->I *REALLY* don't see why people are opposed to having email go back to the
->list. I don't think it is a the big 'munging' issue that people want to make
->it.
Well, for those of you who are using clients that can be tailored to do
what you want and then forgotten about..put this in your
procmailrc..this will help.
:0f
* ^X-Mailinglist: suse-linux-e
| formail -bfi "Reply-To: SLE
On September 22, 2001 10:48 pm, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 22 September 2001 19:55 pm, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I've sort of been hitting the delete key on this thread but as one respondent said: "Just edit the To: line so that the reply goes to the list and not to the sender... No Rocket science here!
Pain in the ass though.... and when you belong to 3 or 4 lists, its a pain to have to check everything out as to whether you have to do that additional editing step or just a simple reply.
I *REALLY* don't see why people are opposed to having email go back to the list. I don't think it is a the big 'munging' issue that people want to make it.
Because every six months somebody wants it changed the **OTHER** way. What ever way it is. Then somebody wants the list spilt because it has too much traffic or something. Nick
participants (23)
-
Ben Rosenberg -
Bernie Gardner -
Bob Rea -
Bruce Marshall -
cikasole -
Cliff Sarginson -
Clint Tinsley -
Corvin Russell -
David Herman -
David McGlone -
Edward Beatty -
Glenn Williams -
James Mohr -
James Oakley -
Jon Clausen -
Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka -
Martin Webster -
Nick Zentena -
Richard Bos -
Stefan Nilsen -
Steven T. Hatton -
Tim van Venrooij -
Timothy Mason