Re: FVWM: question about FvwmButtons config
Thomas Adam thomas.ada...@gmail.com writes: 2009/10/6 Jamie Griffin griff...@cs.man.ac.uk: I've re-read the man page you suggested, however i'm still unclear exactly how i do it. And if i was to try and use two instances of FvwmButtons, how would i do that? *FvwmButtonsGeometry +928+20 That's wrong, even for FVWM 2.4.X -- module commands are now in the form: *Alias: Option value ...note the colon. The colon was added in at some point. Very cleverly, I believe the old syntax still works.
Re: FVWM: question about FvwmButtons config
thomas.ada...@gmail.com said: What is it with people replying off-list? I don't do FVWM consultancy. *Please* keep this on list. Maybe it's the fact that the list is set up so that replies go to Sender, and not to the list. Most people just click on Reply assuming it will go to the correct place. If replies should go to the list, then the list should be appropriately configured. john-
Re: FVWM: question about FvwmButtons config
2009/10/6 des...@verizon.net: Thomas Adam thomas.ada...@gmail.com writes: 2009/10/6 Jamie Griffin griff...@cs.man.ac.uk: I've re-read the man page you suggested, however i'm still unclear exactly how i do it. And if i was to try and use two instances of FvwmButtons, how would i do that? *FvwmButtonsGeometry +928+20 That's wrong, even for FVWM 2.4.X -- module commands are now in the form: *Alias: Option value ...note the colon. The colon was added in at some point. Very cleverly, I believe the old syntax still works. It does still work, but that's not the point, I'd rather see this cleaned up. -- Thomas Adam
FVWM: Meta: Reply-To header (Was: question about FvwmButtons config)
Please forgive the potentially off-topic nature of this message. JM == John Meissen j...@meissen.org writes: JM Maybe it's the fact that the list is set up so that replies go to JM Sender, and not to the list. Most people just click on Reply JM assuming it will go to the correct place. The list doesn't control where replies go; the person sending the reply does. And in any case, correct depends on the nature of the reply; it's completely up to the sender to make sure that the message destination is as intended. It is only a sign of negligence to abdicate that to some piece of software. JM If replies should go to the list, then the list should be JM appropriately configured. You can ask the list software to give you a Reply-To: header if you want it. Just send set replyto to fvwm-requ...@fvwm.org. It's not the default since that behavior is known to be broken. - J
Re: FVWM: Meta: Reply-To header (Was: question about FvwmButtons config)
ti...@math.uh.edu said: The list doesn't control where replies go; the person sending the reply does. And in any case, correct depends on the nature of the reply; it's completely up to the sender to make sure that the message destination is as intended. It is only a sign of negligence to abdicate that to some piece of software. The list can't control the sender's actions, but it can set the default. WRT correct, I expect replies to go back to where the message came from. If I'm replying to an exchange in a mailing list I expect the reply to go to the list. If I'm replying to a private correspondence I expect the reply to go to the individual I'm corresponding with. These aren't difficult concepts. If you want something done a certain way you should make it easier, not more difficult. The way the list is configured now you have to remember to edit the recipient addresses every time you reply to a list email. That will almost guarantee that occasional replies will go out as private emails and not to the list. ti...@math.uh.edu also said: You can ask the list software to give you a Reply-To: header if you want it. Just send set replyto to fvwm-requ...@fvwm.org. It's not the default since that behavior is known to be broken. If by you you mean I (i.e., you), then yes, that's what I was referring to. Most reasonable mail clients will honor the Reply-To: header, and if it's expected to be the default behavior then setting a Reply-To: header value should be list policy, not individual choice. The individual can always override the default. What behavior is broken? Majordomo's ability to add a Repy-To: header to list emails? john-
Re: FVWM: Meta: Reply-To header (Was: question about FvwmButtons config)
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 03:29:06PM -0700, John Meissen wrote: What behavior is broken? Majordomo's ability to add a Repy-To: header to list emails? It's been well-known for ages now that Reply-To munging sucjks, see: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html -- Thomas Adam -- It was the cruelest game I've ever played and it's played inside my head. -- Hush The Warmth, Gorky's Zygotic Mynci.
Re: FVWM: question about FvwmButtons config
When you run a FvwmButtons module, you can give it a name: Module FvwmButtons FvwmButtonsLower The last parameter is used when looking for configuration, so you can go on and configure the second instance independently from the first: *FvwmButtonsLower: Fore Black *FvwmButtonsLower: Frame 1 *FvwmButtonsLower: Back #eec090 *FvwmButtonsLower: Font -adobe-helvetica-bold-r-*-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-*-* *FvwmButtonsLower: Geometry +0-0 *FvwmButtonsLower: Columns 3 ... etc It's also mentioned in the man page, with the name MyButtonBox. Hope this helps, Jacek Kopecky
Re: FVWM: Meta: Reply-To header (Was: question about FvwmButtons config)
2009/10/7 John Meissen j...@meissen.org: ti...@math.uh.edu said: The list doesn't control where replies go; the person sending the reply does. And in any case, correct depends on the nature of the reply; it's completely up to the sender to make sure that the message destination is as intended. It is only a sign of negligence to abdicate that to some piece of software. The list can't control the sender's actions, but it can set the default. WRT correct, I expect replies to go back to where the message came from. If I'm replying to an exchange in a mailing list I expect the reply to go to the list. If I'm replying to a private correspondence I expect the reply to go to the individual I'm corresponding with. These aren't difficult concepts. If you want something done a certain way you should make it easier, not more difficult. The way the list is configured now you have to remember to edit the recipient addresses every time you reply to a list email. That will almost guarantee that occasional replies will go out as private emails and not to the list. Then the right way would not be to set Reply-To headers in the list, but to provide a List-Post header. Using that allows email clients to offer the option reply to list without removing the options to reply to the sender or to reply to all recipients. /Viktor
