Re: CC's on this mailing list
'Lars Wirzenius wrote:' Spam does make furious, extra Cc's from mailing lists don't. They just annoy me (see signature), and in theory they do cost me a bit. Not enough to make me worry about it, but enough to write kilobyte after kilobyte about it. I do wish that people wouldn't Cc me when I read the mailing list. I feel that it is good netiquette not to do that. I like the CCs because lately I haven't been able to keep up with the list and knowing that someone responded to something (which shows up in my mailbox and not the procmail filter) is useful. This may be a mark that we or I don't think there is enough real problems with Debian. Hm, perhaps the three month release schedule is one: we have one month left for the next release, and we're just about to make a big change in source packaging? Perhaps it would be better to wait an extra month for this occasion only? I don't think we have a good mechanism for code cleanups before a major release. Instead, I think that sticking with stable releases from upstream is the way to keep Debian stable. I like the three month schedule, but feel it is mostly independent of maintainer issues. Though perhaps we should save the source package changes for the release after next month's? -- Christopher J. Fearnley|Linux/Internet Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] |UNIX SIG Leader at PACS http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf |(Philadelphia Area Computer Society) ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf|Design Science Revolutionary Dare to be Naive -- Bucky Fuller |Explorer in Universe
Re: CC's on this mailing list
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] But when you have the right phone, and you know the trick with the Follow button you can dial for free (even internationally!). If you get caught they are less likely to let you visit their country again :-) . I got a speeding ticket from the darn traffic camera while I was there, too. They didn't mail it to me until I was back in the States. I had little choice but to pay it, as I figured they'd stop me at Immigration next time I visited if I didn't pay up. Bruce
Re: CC's on this mailing list
You (Bruce Perens) wrote: About the funniest part is trying to find a pay phone. Many countries only have them in post offices. When I visited Australia, there were blue phones and gold phones, and only the gold ones could make long distance calls. But when you have the right phone, and you know the trick with the Follow button you can dial for free (even internationally!). An old backpackers trick :). These are the orange ones you find in pubs and government buildings. Mike. -- Miquel van| Cistron Internet Services --Alphen aan den Rijn. Smoorenburg, | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cistron.nl/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Tel: +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data)
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Dale Scheetz writes (Re: CC's on this mailing list): ... However, there are several people who post to the lists, but don't read them, who ask to be responded to directly. Maybe we should just require that these people suffer reading the lists like the rest of us? Yes. It is rude to post to a mailing list or newsgroup that you don't read (except certain closed lists that operate more like aliases, eg [EMAIL PROTECTED] which forwards to debian-private or [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Ian.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Mr Stuart Lamble wrote: All very nice, but it dodges the major reason for people disliking duplicate copies of messages: they pay for their PPP link (or UUCP feed, or whatever). Identifying duplicates by their message IDs means that you have to download both messages, unless you can do the filtering at your ISP's end of the link. I'm not overly concerned personally at the moment - I'm at university, and the government pays for my feed :-) - but it's generally not good etiquette full stop. Bandwidth prices have dropped quite healthily in recent years, and they are going to continue to do so. Rambling on about being cc'd, when the bandwidth prices are still dropping, and YOU HAVE alternatives, is silly at best. Those of you who've been going on and on about this, consuming far too much human-time (on this already excessively voluminous list) : 1) Have you switched up to a 28.8kbps modem yet, or at least a 14.4kbps modem? Yes, modems cost money, but shelling out a little for a modem now may save you heavily in bandwidth if you transfer much data - and would save you a lot more than badgering people about cc'ing. 2) Are you transferring your mail gzip'd? If not, why not? Have you bothered to look for an ISP that will help you do this? This too would save you a lot more than badgering people about cc'ing. 3) Have you bothered to look for an ISP that will do upstream filtering? Have you even bothered to ask your current ISP if they'd be willing? If you want to do all your interaction with the internet over a low bandwidth link, and you're concerned about bandwidth costs, then this SHOULD be a deciding factor in your choice of ISP. This also, would save you a lot more than badgering people about cc'ing.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Bernd Eckenfels: umm... I'm not going to bring calculation examples.. usually you wont notice a few mails eighter in a uucp batch nor in ppp background transmission. Indeed, but it's the principle that matters. Spam isn't costing me all that much either, but I still get furious when I get it. -- Rural sizes win [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.iki.fi/liw/ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. pgpCVLotWkwuy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Hi, All very nice, but it dodges the major reason for people disliking duplicate copies of messages: they pay for their PPP link (or UUCP feed, or whatever). I wasn't thinking about this. Good point. umm... I'm not going to bring calculation examples.. usually you wont notice a few mails eighter in a uucp batch nor in ppp background transmission. Of course the duplicates are anoying, the problem is, that one has to use eigther reply and modifier the target, or use group reply and remove the author. Both is anoying and often i simply forget to. (Of course email programs could be fixed to be able to deal with mailinglists which dont set the From/Reply-To). Greetings Bernd
Re: CC's on this mailing list
On Fri, 9 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: I'm considering adding a paragraph to the policy manual telling people not to CC each other when replying to messages on debian-devel. Is it the consensus of the list that this would be a good idea ? It would certainly keep the multiplicity of messages down to just two. However, there are several people who post to the lists, but don't read them, who ask to be responded to directly. Maybe we should just require that these people suffer reading the lists like the rest of us? Anything that keeps the mail at my end from being so redundant would be greatly appreciated. In fact it would be nice if this message didn't go to you twice, but I don't see any easy way to avoid this, short of writing more functionality into the list manager. Sounds good to me, Dwarf -- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 877-0257 Flexible Software Fax: NONE Black Creek Critters e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you don't see what you want, just ask --
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Ian Jackson writes: Miquel van Smoorenburg writes (Re: CC's on this mailing list): ... I've noticed on some other lists that everything that is posted on the list has From: set to the original sender, Reply-To: to the list address and Cc: deleted. This is actually very nice. Would it be hard (or just a bad idea) to put this in the debian list server? This makes it hard in some mailers to reply to just the poster. Then actually it makes it hard in these mailes to reply to just the list. Since the bulk of the list is made of public discussions done by replying to it, this may be a good reason to have it be the default. After all, if you want to just reply to the author, you have to do something more complicated once, and after that you reply to him normally during the private discussion. With the actual scheme, the complicated thing must be done each time you want to make a public answer. Yves.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Yves Arrouye: Then actually it makes it hard in these mailes to reply to just the list. It's easy to delete addresses, difficult to copy them. Whether public or private replies are more common depends on the writer, not the list. I make a fair number of private answers. Checking your To and Cc is just the same as checking your Newsgroups line. You _must_ do it, whether there is a Reply-to or not. Basic courtesy and self-preservation. I fear there is no objectively best answer for this problem. Perhaps mail needs a Followup-to header. I've been on lists that have a Reply-to to the list. It's horrible enough that it actually deters me from replying at all. -- Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.iki.fi/liw/ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. pgp7LygBWQ3fF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Brian C. White writes: I'm considering adding a paragraph to the policy manual telling people not to CC each other when replying to messages on debian-devel. Is it the consensus of the list that this would be a good idea ? If it is relavent to me specifically (eg. relates to one of my packages), then I like being copied because it means I won't miss it in the volume of the list. Is it because you filter to mail folders depending on the To: field (the only reason I see that would make the messages appear differently)? In this case, can't you just use your package names as a selection criterion for which messages are more important for you? Yves.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Miquel van Smoorenburg writes (Re: CC's on this mailing list): ... I've noticed on some other lists that everything that is posted on the list has From: set to the original sender, Reply-To: to the list address and Cc: deleted. This is actually very nice. Would it be hard (or just a bad idea) to put this in the debian list server? This makes it hard in some mailers to reply to just the poster. Ian.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
I'm considering adding a paragraph to the policy manual telling people not to CC each other when replying to messages on debian-devel. Is it the consensus of the list that this would be a good idea ? It's a difficult call. Quite often I get copies of mail simply because I posted the msg being replied to, even though it is only relavent to the group and not me specifically. If it is relavent to me specifically (eg. relates to one of my packages), then I like being copied because it means I won't miss it in the volume of the list. The best solution I can think of would be a daemon that monitors the lists and if it sees an outgoing message that was copied to someone else, it sends a very polite email saying that the user should be sure to copy the original author _only_ if it specifically relates to him/her. Making sure that such a notice doesn't get mailed to a user more than once a month would also be a good idea. It's more work, but I think it would have the best results in the end. Brian ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) --- In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Re: CC's on this mailing list
Yves Arrouye writes (CC's on this mailing list): Ian Jackson writes: I'm considering adding a paragraph to the policy manual telling people not to CC each other when replying to messages on debian-devel. Is it the consensus of the list that this would be a good idea ? It would be nice also to not have long messages fully quoted :-( Right, this is going into the policy manual. Ian.
