Re: Re: Mailing-list configuration

The whole sentence was: Mozilla isn't free and Google Chrome is :-D! and was of course ironic. Jacques

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Thursday 16 June 2016 16:31:21 Dan Purgert wrote: > > In the end, however, we are all at each others' mercy. :-/ > > Indeed we are.  The people who send HTML messages often create "fun" > issues (as my client expects text alone).  But, "text only" is now > seemingly the "alternate" rather than

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 16 June 2016 13:47:54 Dan Purgert wrote: >> In addition, I feel that both parties in the original problem >> (apparently Lisi and Nicolas -- please correct me if I'm wrong) each >> have some fault in the matter.  Mainly, this seems to stem from each of >> you

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Thursday 16 June 2016 13:47:54 Dan Purgert wrote: > In addition, I feel that both parties in the original problem > (apparently Lisi and Nicolas -- please correct me if I'm wrong) each > have some fault in the matter.  Mainly, this seems to stem from each of > you assuming that the other's MUA

Re: Mailing-list configuration

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:20:11AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: [...] > Really? Whatever... to claim Mozilla was 'not free' based solely on the > one little issue with the trademarked logo was just plain silly. *plonk* -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Nicolas George wrote: > Now, finally, how do we achieve automation? > > The ideal solution would be to have a real header telling us what to do: > "List-Reply-To: list" or "List-Reply-To: sender, list". Unfortunately, the > people in charge of that messed it up, they invented these useless headers

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/16/2016 7:45 AM, < wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 07:26:37AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: >> On 6/15/2016 4:23 PM, Rodary Jacques wrote: >>> Mozilla isn't free >> What a ridiculous claim this has always been by debianites... > This is an unnecessary slur.

Re: Mailing-list configuration

My last reply to the spammer aka 'Nicolas George'... On 6/16/2016 5:28 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > With that in mind, you realize that the reply-to-list feature is bad UI > design: No, but I did take a minute to test and discovered my MUA of choice (Thunderbird) does have a bug

Re: Mailing-list configuration

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 07:26:37AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 6/15/2016 4:23 PM, Rodary Jacques wrote: > > Not using any MUA, just a browser (Opera, which is BTW in the official > > Debian list: https://wiki.debian.org/WebBrowsers,

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/15/2016 4:23 PM, Rodary Jacques wrote: > Not using any MUA, just a browser (Opera, which is BTW in the official > Debian list: https://wiki.debian.org/WebBrowsers, non-free but I don't > know why as it is a Mozilla clone; Mozilla isn't free What a ridiculous claim this has

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Le nonidi 29 prairial, an CCXXIV, Andrew McGlashan a écrit : > If you see no reply-to header, then only do reply to list as already > instructed with L for mutt, which I don't use. > > Always do reply to list, it's simple. IF someone says they are not > subscribed, please CC me, then take that

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 14/06/2016 3:09 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > The lack of reply-to header. If you see no reply-to header, then only do reply to list as already instructed with L for mutt, which I don't use. Always do reply to list, it's simple. IF someone says they are not subscribed, please CC me, then

Re: Re: Mailing-list configuration

I used another post from the thread "Non-firefox browser" , which I quoted: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/06/msg00437.html so that nobody in this thread feels targeted ;-). Take a look at it. Again, sorry for my *E*nglish. Jacques P.S.: In 2002

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 06/15/2016 03:23 PM, Rodary Jacques wrote: Not using any MUA, just a browser (Opera, which is BTW in the official Debian list: https://wiki.debian.org/WebBrowsers, non-free but I don't know why as it is a Mozilla clone; Mozilla isn't free and Google Chrome is :-D), and I read the posts

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Wednesday 15 June 2016 21:23:07 Rodary Jacques wrote: > Not using any MUA, just a browser (Opera, which is BTW in the official > Debian list: https://wiki.debian.org/WebBrowsers, non-free but I don't know > why as it is a Mozilla clone; Mozilla isn't free and Google Chrome is :-D), > and I

Re: Re: Mailing-list configuration

Not using any MUA, just a browser (Opera, which is BTW in the official Debian list: https://wiki.debian.org/WebBrowsers, non-free but I don't know why as it is a Mozilla clone; Mozilla isn't free and Google Chrome is :-D), and I read the posts of the list in this browser (or in any other)

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 04:57:05PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2016 14:46:42 Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > On Monday 13 June 2016 19:35:54 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > And I am not sure that this tempest in a teapot is all about, the > > > older kmail that I use and the older TBird that

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:31:11PM -0400, Ric Moore wrote: > On 06/13/2016 04:09 PM, Erwan David wrote: > >Le 13/06/2016 à 23:08, Doug a écrit : > >> > >>On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > >>>Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > >>> > >>/snip/ > >> > >>Just what

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:36:05PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > > I have always found that when using mutt, as we both seem to do, "L" > > replys to a message and sends that reply to the list only. > > For the last time: this command

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:06:14PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG (황병희) wrote: [...] > Hey tomas! You are always welcome! > There is no issue in here for your commests. Just take this as my personal opinion. Others may disagree. In any case thank you very

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Morten Bo Johansen a écrit : > > Since you are using Mutt, all you need to do to be well behaved > > (i.e. not send personal CCs) is to hit 'L' when you reply > > As I already explained twice, a

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 02:57:29PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > But we have to also remember that mutt is very very loong in the > tooth Lisi. I've looked at it but never used it, so I've no knowledge if > its have any serious TLC in the last decade. "Mutt 1.6.1 was released on May 1,

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 02:57:29PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > But we have to also remember that mutt is very very loong in the > tooth Lisi. I've looked at it but never used it, so I've no knowledge if > its have any serious TLC in the last decade. These mailing list / reply to arguments

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 05:12:57PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : > > This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a mailing > > list. > > > > If your client doesn't have this, then maybe it is time to consider > > changing.

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 18:31:11 Ric Moore wrote: > On 06/13/2016 04:09 PM, Erwan David wrote: > > Le 13/06/2016 à 23:08, Doug a écrit : > >> On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > >>> Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > >> > >> /snip/ > >> > >> Just what planet

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:17 AM Morten Bo Johansen wrote: > On 2016-06-13 Nicolas George wrote: > > > As I already explained twice, a solution that requires a > > different action when it is a mailing-list and when it is not > > is not an acceptable solution. > > Why not? Don't

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 23:31:11 Ric Moore wrote: > On 06/13/2016 04:09 PM, Erwan David wrote: > > Le 13/06/2016 à 23:08, Doug a écrit : > >> On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > >>> Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > >> > >> /snip/ > >> > >> Just what planet are

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 22:08:36 Doug wrote: > On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > > /snip/ > > Just what planet are you writing from, Bob? I don't recognize the date > at all. It isn't Bob that put that date in - it's

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 06/13/2016 04:09 PM, Erwan David wrote: Le 13/06/2016 à 23:08, Doug a écrit : On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : /snip/ Just what planet are you writing from, Bob? I don't recognize the date at all. Bob is across

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 14:46:42 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2016 19:35:54 Gene Heskett wrote: > > And I am not sure that this tempest in a teapot is all about, the > > older kmail that I use and the older TBird that I have unwillingly > > used way back up the logbook now, both have a

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 06/13/2016 12:43 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: But you manage it. You take the trouble. I do because I've seen such whinage from people who get email to them. All that goes into the archives. I don't like iMail's stupidity but there's not a lot I can do if I want a light laptop on the bedside

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Le 13/06/2016 à 23:08, Doug a écrit : > > On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: >> Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : >> > /snip/ > > Just what planet are you writing from, Bob? I don't recognize the > date at all. > > --doug > > That's french revolutionary calendar

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 06/13/2016 02:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : /snip/ Just what planet are you writing from, Bob? I don't recognize the date at all. --doug

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Bob Holtzman a écrit : > I have always found that when using mutt, as we both seem to do, "L" > replys to a message and sends that reply to the list only. For the last time: this command works only for mailing-lists, not for private discussions, and therefore is

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/13/2016 12:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Let me try to re-state it one more time another way: > > A is annoyed by unwanted CCs and wants to make it stop. > > Solution 1: ask every people who reply to A, i.e. people who do not care > about the unwanted CCs, to make a

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 13:51:46 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2016 18:09:23 Nicolas George wrote: > > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > > > So tell us how. You have not done so. You have said: > > > - > > > Conforming to that attitude,

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 19:35:50 Dutch Ingraham wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:51:46PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Monday 13 June 2016 18:09:23 Nicolas George wrote: > > > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > > > > meant to go to the mailing list. Any half way decent

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Monday 13 June 2016 12:39:31 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2016 17:36:53 Nicolas George wrote: > > Solution 2: A makes the moderate punctual effort to configure the > > MUA to set the header correctly and directly reaps the benefits. > > > > Stated like that, it is pretty much a

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 19:35:54 Gene Heskett wrote: > And I am not sure that this tempest in a teapot is all about, the older > kmail that I use and the older TBird that I have unwillingly used way > back up the logbook now, both have a reply-to-list button.  This is a > list and I use that button

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 19:24:43 ghe wrote: > On 06/13/2016 10:48 AM, Martin Read wrote: > > Solution 3: A makes the probably-smaller-per-incident effort to set up > > filters dropping on the floor any mail sent by the people whose MUAs > > have bad default behaviour on Debian mailing lists. > > >

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 11:28:00 Cindy-Sue Causey wrote: > On 6/13/16, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : > >> This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a > >> mailing list. > >> > >> If your client doesn't have

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:51:46PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2016 18:09:23 Nicolas George wrote: > > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > meant to go to the mailing list. Any half way decent mail client can be > configured to reply to a mailing list when

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 06/13/2016 10:48 AM, Martin Read wrote: Solution 3: A makes the probably-smaller-per-incident effort to set up filters dropping on the floor any mail sent by the people whose MUAs have bad default behaviour on Debian mailing lists. E-mail sent to the Debian mailing list contains sufficient

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Lisi writes: > He is too important. That's what killfiles are for. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 05:42:40PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: snip... > > > Mine do (and I have explained the procedure to achieve it), therefore I > never receive unwanted CCs and I am perfectly happy about it. I guess some > people like whining. If yours do, you will

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 18:51:46 Bob Holtzman wrote: > I suspect (maybe wrong) that you > may be one of those individuals that wants to do it his/her way and the > hell with the CoC. Like I said, maybe I'm wrong. He has actually said that in so many words. He can't be bothered to follow CoCs.

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 18:09:23 Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > > So tell us how. You have not done so. You have said: > > - > > Conforming to that attitude, I have documented my personal preferences in > > the headers

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On 2016-06-13 Nicolas George wrote: > As I already explained twice, a solution that requires a > different action when it is a mailing-list and when it is not > is not an acceptable solution. Why not? Don't you know when you are corresponding on a mailing list or not? You only need to switch

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Martin Read writes: > Solution 3: A makes the probably-smaller-per-incident effort to set up > filters dropping on the floor any mail sent by the people whose MUAs > have bad default behaviour on Debian mailing lists. Or to detect and drop duplicates whatever the cause. -- John Hasler

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > So tell us how. You have not done so. You have said: > - > Conforming to that attitude, I have documented my personal preferences in > the headers of the mails I send with the following Mutt rules: > >

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 13/06/16 17:36, Nicolas George wrote: Solution 1: ask every people who reply to A, i.e. people who do not care about the unwanted CCs, to make a (moderate) effort without getting any benefit for themselves. Solution 2: A makes the moderate punctual effort to configure the MUA to set the

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Monday 13 June 2016 17:36:53 Nicolas George wrote: > Solution 2: A makes the moderate punctual effort to configure the MUA to > set the header correctly and directly reaps the benefits. > > Stated like that, it is pretty much a no-brainer. Except that you are continuing to refuse to explain

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Morten Bo Johansen a écrit : > Since you are using Mutt, all you need to do to be well behaved > (i.e. not send personal CCs) is to hit 'L' when you reply As I already explained twice, a solution that requires a different action when it is a mailing-list and

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 16:42:40 Nicolas George wrote: > Mark Fletcher: > > You know we are not talking about running a nuclear reactor here, right? > > What is your point? > > > But this only works if all participants agree to use such headers, > > surely? > > No. The header I am referring to has

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Monday 13 June 2016 16:12:57 Nicolas George wrote: > I gave the technical solution and headers I use. I asked what *I* needed to do, and how to do it, to avoid your replies. Not what you do to insist on replying to me. As you say, you have told me. I consider that one ought to "reply to

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/13/2016 11:42 AM, John Hasler wrote: > "Reply to List" needs to be enabled in the mailing list software. Not precisely right - mailing list software only needs to add the appropriate list headers defined by the relevant RFCs. This list does (and so Reply-To-List works

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On 2016-06-13 Nicolas George wrote: > Le quintidi 25 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : >> I expect you to conform to the CoC and not continue to reply to me >> personally. > > Nobody can be expected to remember the personal preferences of each > mailing-list member, nor the subscription

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Mark Fletcher: > You know we are not talking about running a nuclear reactor here, right? What is your point? > But this only works if all participants agree to use such headers, surely? No. The header I am referring to has been supported by all half-decent MUAs for years, possibly decades, and

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Mark Fletcher writes: > Or does it need to be a feature of the machines hosting the list? "Reply to List" needs to be enabled in the mailing list software. Thus those who want it need to take the issue up with the list masters. In the meantime, it's a feature this list does not have.

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/13/16, Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : >> This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a mailing >> list. >> >> If your client doesn't have this, then maybe it is time to consider >> changing. > > I am not sure

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/13/2016 11:12 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : >> This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a mailing >> list. >> >> If your client doesn't have this, then maybe it is time to consider >> changing. > I am

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:13 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : > > If you are referring to a MUA command, then first let me remind you that > MUA > commands are not standardized, and therefore using the name of the command > on

Re: Mailing-list configuration

Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Tanstaafl a écrit : > This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a mailing > list. > > If your client doesn't have this, then maybe it is time to consider > changing. I am not sure what you are aiming at. If "Reply-To-List" is supposed to be

Re: Mailing-list configuration

On 6/13/2016 5:57 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Nobody can be expected to remember the personal preferences of each > mailing-list member, This is why Reply-To-List is the way to reply when engaged in a mailing list. If your client doesn't have this, then maybe it is time to

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Monday 13 June 2016 15:17:19 Nicolas George wrote: > Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > > I appreciate that. Thank you. But it isn't just my personal > > preferences, it is part of the CoC: > > And the mail headers state differently. Given contradictory directives, I >

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

Le sextidi 26 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > I appreciate that. Thank you. But it isn't just my personal preferences, it > is part of the CoC: And the mail headers state differently. Given contradictory directives, I explained in my previous mail why the only sane solution is to

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:34:06PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG (황병희) wrote: > On 2016년 6월 13일 오후 8시 52분 49초 GMT+09:00, Lisi Reisz > wrote: > >On Monday 13 June 2016 10:57:05 Nicolas George wrote: > >> [...] > >"When replying to

Re: Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

On Monday 13 June 2016 10:57:05 Nicolas George wrote: > This time only, as a particular courtesy, I have edited manually the list > of recipients to adhere to your personal preferences. I appreciate that. Thank you. But it isn't just my personal preferences, it is part of the CoC: "When

Mailing-list configuration (was: Big dummy at work again)

Le quintidi 25 prairial, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > I expect you to conform to the CoC and not continue to reply to me personally. Nobody can be expected to remember the personal preferences of each mailing-list member, nor the subscription status of all contributors, and more importantly