On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Jed Brown wrote: > But this is drifting off-topic. The question is whether it's better to > munge Reply-to for petsc-users and petsc-dev, which boils down to: > > Is it feasible to adopt mailing list etiquette of using "reply-all" or > must we stick with the current mode of munging Reply-to? > > The former has many benefits, including making more email discussion > searchable.
This benefit is a bit dubious - as you'll get some migration of petsc-maint traffic to petsc-users - but then you loose all the 'reply-to-individual' emails from the archives [yeah - reply-to-reply emails with cc:list added get archived - perhaps with broken threads]. For myself - I can fixup my client side config for mailing lists to be similar to petsc-maint. So this change is up to you and Barry - who deal with these personal e-mails [which I guess you are already used to - and are ok with] And then there is spam - which you say can be dealt with filters. Is this client side or server side? Side note: if its client side - then I would expect users could be doing the same for current mode - and not have to do the 'subscribe' but set config to 'not recieve e-mails' stuff. satish
