On Friday 10 February 2006 11:23, Dave Donovan wrote: > "Stop preparing and just do it already!" (did anyone see Spaceballs?)
Yes, and I already have to watch it again due to a reference about time that was posted on Slashdot yesterday. :-) > The only way to acheive the behaviour you're looking for, and that I prefer > personally, is to manually delete the TO address and move the CC up to the > TO field. Yes, it's a clearly missing function in gmail's user interface, as well as Outlook's. At least to anyone even remotely technical, IMO. > Would it be better if the list server used the list address in the > 'reply-to' header field? I've never setup a mailing list so I'm not sure > if this is possible or even desirable. No. Reply-To is not to be used for that with mailing lists, and there are plenty of references why, but they all come back to some variant of this one: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html RFC2369 addresses this as well. Now to be fair, there is also a "reply-to considered useful" page, but the domain it's on has been taken over. Google's cache finds it just fine though, so googling for that phrase and hitting "cached" will show that for you. (I'm avoiding pasting a hugeass link or tinyurl'd link to something that may disappear.) Personally, I think that MUA's missing this function (reply to list) are incomplete. I honestly thought gmail would have had that, but some other googling shows that this is indeed not the case, and others have run against it as well. -A.
