On Mar 21, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Ralph Shumaker wrote:
In between those two should be one other, but Sparky seems to kill that one. I tried adding the field "Reply-To:" and directing it to the -kooler list. This would have the benefit of allowing anyone in the current list to see my post, but if they try to reply they will have to be subscribed to the -kooler list. Of course, he would have the option to force his response back to the current list or to reply privately.
In previous, nearly endless, debates, it was decided that the default behavior of "hitting 'reply' replies to the list" was desired. Indeed, that's how it's done on nearly every mailing list I'm on, and lists that don't behave that way really throw me off. For all intents and purposes, think of the list as a newsgroup, and replies by default go to the group.
Mailman (and most list managers) enforce this by setting Reply-To: to the list address. The Nicer Solution (tm) would be if clients would ALSO support Followups-To:, but it seems that only mutt offers that option, IIRC. (I'm not a mutt user, btw.)
IMHO, changing the To: header in a reply is not any harder than adding a Followups-To: or Reply-To:, with the added benefit that the list manager won't mangle the To: header.
Never a perfect solution, and we'll never make everyone happy, but close enough is good enough, right? :)
Gregory -- Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: EAF4844B keyserver: pgpkeys.mit.edu -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
