Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade wrote: > 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? :) >
Nice summary GKRA, would this be a good thing to put on our website under some kind of admin-policies/FAQ category? Regards, ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
