On Mon, February 2, 2009 12:24, Carlos E. R. wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Sunday, 2009-02-01 at 21:00 -0800, Kai Ponte wrote:

...

Actually, I fixed it using another method.

However, I prefer on mailing lists - something I've been using since the '90s - that the default is reply to list, not to the individual. That must be a listserver setting.

Well, it is a listserver setting that this server will not touch user's headers like reply-to. And actually, there was a vote, and will not be changed - so stop complaining.

I want a recount! ;-) No seriously, when was this vote? 1993? How many people voted? How well do they represent the current people on the list? When is the next election? That are questions that should be asked when someone says "there was a vote". IMHO there is no place for democracy in Software Libre - only benevolent dictatorship. -- Amedee -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, 2009-02-02 at 14:38 +0100, Clayton wrote:

On Monday, 2009-02-02 at 14:31 +0100, Amedee Van Gasse wrote:

...

No seriously, when was this vote? 1993? How many people voted? How well do they represent the current people on the list? When is the next election? That are questions that should be asked when someone says "there was a vote".

It was about 2 years ago... I think.

You have to wonder.. the fact that this comes up over and over and over and over seems to show that maybe there is a problem here. Of course when you raise the question, you're just told you're stupid and to use a real mail client etc., etc.

This discussion is as absurd as those about vi versus emacs. The FAQ: Q7. Why do my replies go to the original poster and not the list? A7. There is a more complete answer in FAQ, but the short answer is that it's better this way. Trust us on this one, please. ... 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

My favorite is the excuse that it is like this so that you can easily contact people off-list. like that is the reason we are on this mailing list.. to contact everyone privately, and we all reply privately all the time... instead of to the list.

Another is that it blocks autoresponder loops. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmG/LkACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VvwACfe4q8oreXuYRb1cjubHdUEFnS bkkAn03n7kpwYARcnPDIuDGQO/hok8G9 =cJBh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Mon, February 2, 2009 15:04, Felix Miata wrote:

...

How many people voted? How well do they represent the current people on the list?

These are the pertinent questions. It's not so much the count as the representation. The casual subscribers, those who frequent friendlier lists and want it done the way most lists do it, would have been less likely to notice a pending vote announcement. OTOH, the militant regulars with their reply-to-list buttons would have been less likely to miss the opportunity to rubber stamp the general minority status quo.

What about the new militants that just came over from other lists (like Debian)? For the record: I would vote against munging, if I was forced to vote. But on the other hand I am against democracy in software and related projects.

...

When is the next election?

Probably when hell freezes over.

Don't bring religion in technical discussions. Please.

...

IMHO there is no place for democracy in Software Libre - only benevolent dictatorship.

Democracy is tyranny of the majority. People in USA holler about it a lot, yet USA is a republic, which is not the same thing.

Who's talking about the USA? I live in a parliamentary democracy (Belgium). Anyway you seem to agree with me that democracy is a bad thing for Free Software. -- Amedee -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/02/02 16:31 (GMT+0100) Amedee Van Gasse composed from Belgium:

On Mon, February 2, 2009 15:04, Felix Miata wrote:

...

These are the pertinent questions. It's not so much the count as the representation. The casual subscribers, those who frequent friendlier lists and want it done the way most lists do it, would have been less likely to notice a pending vote announcement. OTOH, the militant regulars with their reply-to-list buttons would have been less likely to miss the opportunity to rubber stamp the general minority status quo.

What about the new militants that just came over from other lists (like Debian)?

What about them? Just as new militants join, so do ordinary people. Based on the ~40 lists I'm on, it's clear that the militants are in the global minority even if on particular lists they are vocal and may even constitute the vocal or even genuine majority.

...

Probably when hell freezes over.

Don't bring religion in technical discussions. Please.

You're confusing a common English language euphemism for the English word 'never' with religion. Maybe that doesn't have a Belgian counterpart, but this is an English language list.

...

Democracy is tyranny of the majority. People in USA holler about it a lot, yet USA is a republic, which is not the same thing.

Who's talking about the USA?

USA as most influential single country and oldest existing government in the world is the typical inference when the concept of democracy is mentioned, even though a democracy it isn't.

Anyway you seem to agree with me that democracy is a bad thing for Free Software.

Each case stands on its own merit in my book. Mailing lists are not free software. Those like this one are community forums, places where public discussion takes place, where non-public response is the well-understood exception rather than general rule. Maybe RFC 2833 should be or is authoritative, but what is it is not is law. I don't care who authored a mailing list post unless I wish to contact that person directly. For the few exceptions to the general rule list as intended destination, I'm perfectly capable of capturing the originator's email address and pasting it appropriately as replacement for the default. AFAIC, a mailing list is the sender, regardless of author, and the sender is who by default, by whatever means it can be effectuated, should get the reply. That means as long as most (by mail volume) popular mail agents omit support for the List-Post header field, most open community mailing lists should munge, in order that the greatest number of list replies actually reach their inferred destination. -- "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up." Ephesians 4:29 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Mon February 2 2009 6:24:44 am Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Sunday, 2009-02-01 at 21:00 -0800, Kai Ponte wrote:

...

Actually, I fixed it using another method.

However, I prefer on mailing lists - something I've been using since the '90s - that the default is reply to list, not to the individual. That must be a listserver setting.

Well, it is a listserver setting that this server will not touch user's headers like reply-to. And actually, there was a vote, and will not be changed - so stop complaining.

-- Cheers, Carlos E. R.

Seeing as a 'vote was taken', the inference is that this list is a democratic entity of some sort. That being the case and given that democratic entities periodically resubmit the issues and leadership to the constituants/voters for evaluation/reevaluation (otherwise countries like the US would still have George Bush as President...or Jimmy Carter...or Nixon perhaps) because issues and circumstances change and confirmation and adjustments to proceedure and law often need to be made accordingly. Just because something was voted on and passed by the 13 original colonies (in the US for example) and the people living/voting at that time made a choice, that doesn't mean that the rest of the newly added states and the new voters shouldn't have a say in their laws and leaders now. (Substitute your own countries history as appropriate). Linux and SuSE has grown and new users and new programs have appeared since that original vote. Richard -- Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

However, a vote of the sort you refer to in this context can be nothing more than advisory (informing the authority in question of the denizens' preferences), since this is a technical matter and must be resolved primarily on technical merits.

generally it is up to the people in charge to make policy, (based on advice, etc, from the people), and the technicians (read: list administrator) to implement the policy. And this isn't even a difficult thing to do, so its not as if the administrator is going to have a hard time implementing the policy.. at the end of the day, the question is: is this a mailing list for the subscribers, or for the administrator.... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/02/11 14:21 (GMT+1300) Philip Dowie composed:

On 2009/02/10 16:59 (GMT-0800) Randall R Schulz composed:

...

However, a vote of the sort you refer to in this context can be nothing more than advisory (informing the authority in question of the denizens' preferences), since this is a technical matter and must be resolved primarily on technical merits.

generally it is up to the people in charge to make policy, (based on advice, etc, from the people), and the technicians (read: list administrator) to implement the policy. And this isn't even a difficult thing to do, so its not as if the administrator is going to have a hard time implementing the policy..

at the end of the day, the question is: is this a mailing list for the subscribers, or for the administrator....

I have to think in this particular case the vote performed a mere symbolic ratification of an administrative fiat that was justified by at least three factors besides the vote: 1-RFC2833 says don't munge 2-tradition 3-this list is one of many related lists administered by the same mechanism, one best served by keeping behaviors the same among them, at least in the opinion of those responsible for that administration I also think some voters voted, and will continue to vote, with their feet, leaving this list, and possibly openSUSE, for friendlier forums. The other big 10 Linux distros' support lists that I'm on all munge, and don't get into this particular type of recurring junk thread. Ease of use isn't just about present or absent reply-to-list buttons, or the technical merits of the distro itself. -- "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up." Ephesians 4:29 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Shanahan" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:30 PM Subject: Re: [opensuse] Reply to mailing lists

* Felix Miata [02-10-09 20:44]:

...

I also think some voters voted, and will continue to vote, with their feet, leaving this list, and possibly openSUSE, for friendlier forums.

Yet, after advocating departure, you remain?

...

The other big 10 Linux distros' support lists that I'm on all munge, and don't get into this particular type of recurring junk thread. Ease of use isn't just about present or absent reply-to-list buttons, or the technical merits of the distro itself.

And you *continue* to participate in the "recurring junk thread"(s).

Haha! So did you. And me, finally. damn. Damn! Curse those munging advocating, top-posting, html and pdf abusing users that all showed up and ruined our nice efficient net when Microsoft and AOL gave the internet to the ignorant unwashed masses. -- Brian K. White brian@aljex.com http://profile.to/KEYofR +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++. filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 10 February 2009 19:21, Philip Dowie wrote:

the question is:  is this a mailing list for the subscribers, or for the administrator.... The mailing list is for the Administrator, to administer, for the subscribers.

-- Kind regards, M Harris <>< -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Roger Oberholtzer wrote:

On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 16:59 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

However, a vote of the sort you refer to in this context can be nothing more than advisory (informing the authority in question of the denizens' preferences), since this is a technical matter and must be resolved primarily on technical merits.

Absolutely. But the main response of many was "it has already been decided". I have been on this list a long time. I think since Novell bought SUSE. I do not recall such a vote. At least not put to the list.

Once they make the minutes to the board of maintainers meeting available pursuant to the adopted guiding principles value of transparency, we will all be able just to read where and when the decision was made and on what basis the decision rests. After all Novell and openSuSE value: <quote> ... transparency of the decision making processes, transparency of communication and transparency of work and collaboration processes. </quote> -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Henne Vogelsang wrote:

Hi,

on 02/11/2009 09:19 AM David C. Rankin wrote:

...

Once they make the minutes to the board of maintainers meeting available

1. There is only me and subscribers. There is no one else involved in decision making about mailinglists. 2. I make the technical decisions. 3. I did the decision that there is no Reply-To. 4. It was challenged by people with the same arguments we are hearing now. 5. It was defended by people with the same arguments we are hearing now. 6. This, as you can see, leads nowhere. 7. I then asked the subscribers if they would respect my decision if a majority backed that up. 8. Everybody agreed and we did a vote. http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2006-08/msg00438.html 9. The outcome was that my decision to not set Reply-To was backed by the majority.

Nothing changed. So there is no point in starting at step 3 again.

Just respect my decision. I'm not saying you have to like it (see point 4 & 5). Just respect it.

Henne

Thank you Henne! I wasn't advocating for any change. The list works just the way it is supposed to for me at least 1/2 the time in thunderbird. This type of transparency goes a long way serving as an olive branch giving all users and supporters an explanation of why something is the way it is. That was no doubt the aim of, and reason behind, adopting the transparency statement in the guiding principles. For the problem itself, I have had good (not perfect) but good results using the reply-to-list add-on to tbird: http://alumnit.ca/wiki/index.php?page=ReplyToListThunderbirdExtension -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

David C. Rankin wrote:

David C. Rankin wrote:

...

For the problem itself, I have had good (not perfect) but good results using the reply-to-list add-on to tbird:

http://alumnit.ca/wiki/index.php?page=ReplyToListThunderbirdExtension

I found the latest link so I thought I would supplement:

http://www.juergen-ernst.de/addons/download/replytolist-0.3.2.xpi

Version 0.3.2 works *great* in thunderbird version 2.0.0.19! 100% All you need to do to reply to the list is hit "ctrl+i" -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 09:38 +0100, Amedee Van Gasse wrote: ..

It is exactly because of that reason, that I disagree with the opinion that this mailing list (and the Linux community in general) is a democracy. It is not! The second hit on Google for "benevolent dictator" is the Wikipedia entry on Benevolent Dictator For Life: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_For_Life

You guys should really read a bit about hacker culture. In the original meaning of the word hacker.

Interesting, my simple question regarding replies to the mailing list has grown into this discussion. I respect the owner/maintainers of this list as is, but disagree that democracy plays any role here. That said: it's their prerogative to decide that certain options are added or removed. In fact, they can decide by themselves to disband the whole mailing list altogether. I do, however, protest against the above notion that the Linux community in general is not democratic. Not that it is not true, but to only mention Linux - or better the OSS community - is not fair. Is there a manufacture who does otherwise? Of course not. It's all about products, brain child's and ego's. What else is new. Frans -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 13 February 09, Amedee Van Gasse wrote:

On Wed, February 11, 2009 01:51, Richard Creighton wrote:

...

<snip>

<snip> a *LOT* of bitching and whining.

-- When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 05 February 2009 04:30:57 pm Robert Smits wrote: <snip>

It is. And none of the listserve developers actually recommend munging the reply-to header to the list address, at least in part because doing so removes your ability to reply only to the sender. <snip>

Changing the Reply-To does not impact the From header. When a list has a Reply-To set, replying to All, then deleting the list address from the recipients list, works perfectly well for replying to an individual rather than the list. I really don't care what this list does with its reply-to. But to say that reply-to munging "removes your ability to reply only to the sender" is plain wrong. Regards, Tim -- 16:35:01 up 27 days, 3 min, 2 users, load average: 0.08, 0.28, 0.27 "It's what you learn after you know it all that counts" John Wooden

On Thursday 05 February 2009 15:31:56 Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Thursday, 2009-02-05 at 16:44 -0500, Tim Wunder wrote:

...

I really don't care what this list does with its reply-to. But to say that reply-to munging "removes your ability to reply only to the sender" is plain wrong.

And saying it is "plain wrong" is also wrong :-P It depends on your mail program interpretation of "reply to all". Some may not include the sender.

But, assuming that the sender is a member of the list, if "reply to all" includes separate messages to the sender AND the list, that's clearly not right. A mail client that properly handles list mail headers is the only 'correct' answer. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 06 February 2009 08:49:56 Amedee Van Gasse wrote:

Jerry Houston schreef:

...

On Thursday 05 February 2009 15:31:56 Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On Thursday, 2009-02-05 at 16:44 -0500, Tim Wunder wrote:

...

I really don't care what this list does with its reply-to. But to say that reply-to munging "removes your ability to reply only to the sender" is plain wrong.

And saying it is "plain wrong" is also wrong :-P It depends on your mail program interpretation of "reply to all". Some may not include the sender.

But, assuming that the sender is a member of the list, if "reply to all" includes separate messages to the sender AND the list, that's clearly not right.

A mail client that properly handles list mail headers is the only 'correct' answer.

How about a mail client that recognizes the duplicate message and doesn't show it to me? I really couldn't care less for the duplicates. I would even prefer something postfixy at ehlo that prevents my mailserver from accepting an email that I already got. (damn you filthy spammers! ;-))

I wouldn't call it a solution but a workaround. Sooner or later the dirt stacks up under the carpet, regardless of your desire to hide it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

...

...

On 2/6/2009 at 11:32 AM, Roger Oberholtzer wrote: On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 08:49 +0100, Amedee Van Gasse wrote:

...

How about a mail client that recognizes the duplicate message and doesn't show it to me? I really couldn't care less for the duplicates. I would even prefer something postfixy at ehlo that prevents my mailserver from accepting an email that I already got. (damn you filthy spammers! ;-))

The headers are different. What constitutes a duplicate message?

The Message-ID header which is created when sending the mail. I remember when I was administering a SLOX (SUSE Linux Open Exchange) it was filtering out duplicates.. was very handy. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

* Amedee Van Gasse [02-06-09 02:52]:

How about a mail client that recognizes the duplicate message and doesn't show it to me?

procmail solution: # ------------------------------------------------------- # remove duplicates ## from man procmailex examples ## # 12-13-2002 # ------------------------------------------------------- LOCKFILE = msgid.cache.lock :0 Whc: msgid.lock | $FORMAIL -D 16384 msgid.cache LOCKFILE :0 a: /dev/null # ------------------------------------------------------- -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

* Roger Oberholtzer [02-06-09 11:53]:

On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 10:00 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

procmail solution:

# ------------------------------------------------------- # remove duplicates ## from man procmailex examples ## # 12-13-2002 # ------------------------------------------------------- LOCKFILE = msgid.cache.lock

:0 Whc: msgid.lock | $FORMAIL -D 16384 msgid.cache

LOCKFILE

:0 a: /dev/null # -------------------------------------------------------

D*mn you procmail scripters! Always a solution. :) :)

I am thinking I would put them in a dup directory as a start. But I will have to try this. After I understand it.

# ------------------------------------------------------- # remove duplicates ## from man procmailex examples ## # 12-13-2002 # ------------------------------------------------------- LOCKFILE = msgid.cache.lock :0 Whc: msgid.lock | $FORMAIL -D 16384 msgid.cache LOCKFILE ### save duplicates in case of error :0 a: $MAILDIR/duplicates # ------------------------------------------------------- :^) -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

How about a mail client that recognizes the duplicate message and doesn't show it to me? I really couldn't care less for the duplicates. I would even prefer something postfixy at ehlo that prevents my mailserver from accepting an email that I already got. (damn you filthy spammers! ;-))

now your mail server has to maintain a database (for every user) that tracks who has received what message IDs. Let us presume a message ID is a modest 20 bytes long, then this database grows by about 20 bytes per message received. This list alone receives about 100 messages a day, more or less, so we are at 2k per day just for this one mailing list, and just for one user! Add to that all the other mail, and now lets add a few more users into the mix, and you start to have rather large overheads in terms of space - also, as the database gets bigger, so to does the time to search it.. Now let us consider the other alternative - not maintaining a database, but simply searching the repository of mail to see if the message is there - this will be even slower because there will be more cruft to sort through, and it has the additional dependancy that the user cannot delete mail unless he is happy to receive a deleted message again (since the mail store becomes the database used to detect duplicates) Better, I think, for the MUA to do it than the MTA, and, ideally, to do it in a separate thread of execution - perhaps show me the duplicate until it has decided it is duplicate, and if I've not read the message already, then silently kill it.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

...

...

On 2/6/2009 at 11:31 AM, Roger Oberholtzer wrote: Agreed. I find it a waste of time to have to read the reply to the list AND the reply to me. After all, I have no way of knowing if they really are the same.

Not at all a waste of time for me, but actually a win. I am subscribed to several lists, some have some heavy traffic (some have some lengthy threads like this one, which I'm actually sorry to make it even longer now.. it should finally stop). So if I get a reply on MY message I'm actually glad to get it addressed to me directly as well. Mailing list messages get filtered away and are read 'at convenience'... but when you wait for a reply then you have to check that folder more often... so getting those mails directly addressed to me keeps a copy in my inbox, allowing me to act faster on them. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 12:14 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Friday, 2009-02-06 at 11:31 +0100, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:

...

On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 15:48 -0800, Jerry Houston wrote:

...

But, assuming that the sender is a member of the list, if "reply to all" includes separate messages to the sender AND the list, that's clearly not right.

Agreed. I find it a waste of time to have to read the reply to the list AND the reply to me. After all, I have no way of knowing if they really are the same.

Filter them out to another folder. It is easy. My dups folder contains only 3215 emails since year 2004.

I filter messages to the list to a special folder. I leave messages to me in my inbox (unless I know the poster and have a rule for them). I am guessing there is a procmail formula to detect that is it a duplicate? If so, I am curious what it would compare to. The mail goes into a maildir directory accessed by all mail clients via Courier IMAP. So, how easy is "It is easy"? -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems / Ramböll RST Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden Office: Int +46 8-615 60 20 Mobile: Int +46 70-815 1696 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

* Carlos E. R. [02-06-09 17:17]:

However, my rule is for procmail and mbox folders. I'm not familiar with handling maildir, but Courier may have it's own filtering techniques :-?

only diff that I am aware of is the requirement for a trailing "/" when directories are listed: 0: * ^TO_opensuse@ lists.opensuse/ ^^^^ -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 05 February 2009 17:20:12 Felix Miata wrote:

Unless someone can name an email app that prohibits its user from editing, typing in or pasting in the email address he wishes it sent to, you're wrong to say he's wrong. It doesn't matter what any buttons do as long as the user can get it sent to whatever address he wishes.

Not so. That's like saying nobody needs a calculator as long as they have a paper and pencil. Software is supposed to make our lives easier and better. There's nothing about manually editing To: lines that I consider easier or better than an email client that simply does things right when you click "send". -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/02/05 13:30 (GMT-0800) Robert Smits composed:

...munging the reply-to header to the list address...removes your ability to reply only to the sender.

No, it removes the ability to single click reply directly to the author of the message. The ability to reply to sender (the list, as without the list, the message would not have reached me, the subscriber) remains, as does the ability to reply to the author by pasting or typing his address into the reply message To: field.

http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-useful.html -- "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up." Ephesians 4:29 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org