On Wednesday 01 June 2005 11:47 am, GSR - FR wrote: > Hi, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2005-06-01 at 1522.03 +0100): > > > > This is intentional - google for "reply to considered harmful". > > > > > > This might have been of concern years ago, before people were used to > > > mailing lists which do set the Reply-to header. Nowadays, I'd say that > > > the opposite is true, since setting the Reply-to header seems common > > > practice (at least if I look at the mailing lists I'm following, there > > > are only 2 that don't set the header). > > > > The problem is still the same. > > It is better to accidentally mail only one person and need to resend to > > the list than it is to accidentally send mail to many people. > > After seeing this talk many times in many lists I think the issue is > "dumb mail apps considered harmful". > > Instead of bringing up the thing about reply-to again and again, use > mail apps that understand the concept of mailing list. Some apps had > that feature for some time already so it must not be so hard to > implement, and in some cases it could even be auto detected based in > headers (wow, and solve the unsubscribe problem too when you are at > it). If the app you like does not, fill a bug. I guess it will be > easier than convicing every mailing list admin. > > When there is a button or function that is reply list and other reply > person, how the list is set does not matter. >
I agree 100%. I am using kmail and it handles mailing lists very nicely with only a minimal effort to set it up. I am never confused about who I am replying to. I am sure that there are other examples of email readers that are mailing list smart. Hal _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
