[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I must admit that your solution is right. I suggested another way to
do that, just by feeding the reply-to field to provide to the most the
opportunity to handle the ML with a maximum of usability -simply by
fixing the wrong reply addressee- and allowing the
2007/4/2, Matus UHLAR - fantomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Gal:
Just ask google to implement the list-reply button, it would no harm to you
or them.
I will ;)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 2007-04-01 at 15:46 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/01/07 14:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seth,
I think you really understood my intentions. And still agree with all
of your 6 points. As a personal view, I have the skills to set
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Matus UHLAR - fantomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about MTAs and SMTP here. This is about e-mail headers and MUAs.
That's a large enough hurdle that I think it safe to say the horse
has left the barn on this one a long time ago. Continuing to insist
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 13:46:05 +0100
Bob Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Bob,
Forgive me if I am missing something obvious, but I read this list as
a newsgroup via gmane. This means I can use a 'proper' usenet news
I believe that the Debian Users mailing list gets gated to usenet,
where
Seth,
I think you really understood my intentions. And still agree with all
of your 6 points. As a personal view, I have the skills to set up a
good MUA but this ML makes trouble for my day-to-day usage since I am
using several machines, and I am neither root on all of them nor
authorized to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/01/07 14:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seth,
I think you really understood my intentions. And still agree with all
of your 6 points. As a personal view, I have the skills to set up a
good MUA but this ML makes trouble for my day-to-day
2007/4/1, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In the case of needing access from multiple systems, you should use
the usenet gateway and a newsreader.
nntp://linux.debian.user
or
http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.user
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I must admit that your solution is right. I suggested another way to
do that, just by feeding the reply-to field to provide to the most the
opportunity to handle the ML with a maximum of usability -simply by
fixing the wrong reply addressee- and allowing the users to
Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 15:09 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
[...]
We, however, know that just because Joe User doesn't know any
better, it doesn't mean that there is nothing better.
Ayyaha, men, brother! \o/ \o/ \o/
I always akin it to:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 3:31 PM -0500:
The whole fact that majority of other mailing lists and their users
does not know about this does not mean it's useless.
On 30.03.07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote:
You mean it _could_ be useful if most others went along,
2007/3/31, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Noobie stomps in, uses HTML mail (which you are *still* doing, and
still breaking the Code Of Conduct) and tells us not to follow an
internet standard, because no one else does it.
That's not appreciated.
Sorry for the previous html message, I though
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/3/31, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Noobie stomps in, uses HTML mail (which you are *still* doing, and
still breaking the Code Of Conduct) and tells us not to follow an
internet standard, because no one else does it.
That's not appreciated.
Sorry for
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote on Saturday, March 31, 2007 6:03 AM -0500:
On 30.03.07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote:
That's a large enough hurdle that I think it safe to say the horse
has left the barn on this one a long time ago. Continuing to insist
that things _should_ have been different,
Is it possible to know why the reply-to field is not set to
debian-user@lists.debian.org for each mail coming from the ML ? I am quite
sure you have discussed it before, but I am relatively new to this ML. When
you used not to take care about replying -it is the case in lots of ml, e.g.
gentoo'-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to know why the reply-to field is not set to
debian-user@lists.debian.org mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org for
each mail coming from the ML ? I am quite sure you have discussed it
before, but I am
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 08:09, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to know why the reply-to field is not set to
debian-user@lists.debian.org mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org for
each mail coming from the ML ? I am quite sure you have discussed it
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:09:29 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to know why the reply-to field is not set to
debian-user@lists.debian.org for each mail coming from the ML ? I am quite
sure you have discussed it before, but I am relatively new to this ML. When
you used not to take
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 30 mars 2007 15:28
Subject: Re: [ML ISSUE] reply-to field ?
To: Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Okay, thks for your answer. I still can't see any advantage not to fill in
reply-to, but I can live with reply-to-all ;o)
Rgds
Gal'
2007/3/30
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am forwarding previous answers and adding that I do not want to
pop these mails since I suscribed lots of ML, not only debian ones, and
it is more convenient for me to readwrite from gmail than
IMAP is not interesting for me at work, and there is reply-to-all feature
yet, so I am not sure the problem is coming from Google MUA, but from the
reply-to field instead. I read the Celejar link (thanks for him to have
brought it up) and tried to think that it was the reason why we don't have
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:58:10 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tried to think that it
was the reason why we don't have it in debian ML. But I totally
disagree with it.
Why do we have to have this argument every month? It doesn't matter
if you disagree or not! This is the way this list is, so
On 30.03.07 16:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
? it missed something we are talking about adding Reply-to to ML, not to
day-to-day emails.
it is just the thing considered harmful. Get an e-mail client that supports
List-Reply feature. Mailing list manager should not decide who to send
replies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMAP is not interesting for me at work, and there is reply-to-all
feature yet, so I am not sure the problem is coming from Google MUA, but
from the reply-to field instead. I read the Celejar link (thanks for
him to have
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 9:06 AM -0500:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am forwarding previous answers and adding that I do not want
to pop these mails since I suscribed lots of ML, not only debian
ones,
Joe Hart wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 11:53 AM -0500:
All you are doing is rehashing an argument that has taken place over
and over. You don't like the list, then unsubscribe. Simple.
The OP could have presented his request differently, but I don't think
a binary answer in the spirit of
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:21:34PM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote:
The OP could have presented his request differently, but I don't think
a binary answer in the spirit of love it or leave it is particularly
helpful. The method of handling Reply-To: in this mailing list is in
the minority, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Seth Goodman wrote:
Joe Hart wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 11:53 AM -0500:
All you are doing is rehashing an argument that has taken place over
and over. You don't like the list, then unsubscribe. Simple.
The OP could have presented his
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto � wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:21:34PM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote:
The OP could have presented his request differently, but I don't think
a binary answer in the spirit of love it or leave it is particularly
helpful. The method of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 14:43, Joe Hart wrote:
[snip]
It's just as bad as people moving into a country and then telling the
natives to modify their culture to suit them. It should be the other
way around.
Now that's an invitation to a 10 week OT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 14:09, Seth Goodman wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 9:06 AM -0500:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am forwarding previous answers and adding that I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/30/07 14:43, Joe Hart wrote:
[snip]
It's just as bad as people moving into a country and then telling the
natives to modify their culture to suit them. It should be the other
way around.
Now that's an invitation to a
On 03/30/07 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am forwarding previous answers and adding that I do not want
to pop these mails since I suscribed lots of ML, not only debian
ones, and it is more convenient for me to readwrite from gmail
than poping 3 times (work - home - laptop)
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 15:09 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/30/07 14:09, Seth Goodman wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 9:06 AM -0500:
On 03/30/07 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am forwarding previous answers and adding that I do not want
to pop these mails since I
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 3:31 PM -0500:
The whole fact that majority of other mailing lists and their users
does not know about this does not mean it's useless.
You mean it _could_ be useful if most others went along, which they
haven't. There are a lot of things
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 15:46, Greg Folkert wrote:
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 15:09 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
It's like using MSFT. If all you've ever known is a buggy malware-
filled OS, and you've been conditioned to grab your ankles, crying
Thank you Mr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 3:31 PM -0500:
The whole fact that majority of other mailing lists and their users
does not know about this does not mean it's useless.
You mean it
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 4:42 PM -0500:
On 03/30/07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote:
That's a large enough hurdle that I think it safe to say the horse
has left the barn on this one a long time ago. Continuing to insist
that things _should_ have been different, long past the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 16:50, Seth Goodman wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 4:42 PM -0500:
On 03/30/07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote:
That's a large enough hurdle that I think it safe to say the horse
has left the barn on this one a long time
Okay guys,
so, just to calm down,
I never told you what to do. I just faced twice the problem of answering to
the wrong addressee, and I saw that it happens sometimes to others. I
listened to your proposal of using a MUA, then argued that it was not
suiting my needs. (I don't think just about
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 5:50 PM -0500:
And the counter argument would be that not-munging-Reply-To has
always been popular amongst people who know what they are doing.
Most people who know what they're doing don't insist that the rest
of the world changes its behavior on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 18:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay guys,
so, just to calm down,
I never told you what to do. I just faced twice the problem of answering
to the wrong addressee, and I saw that it happens sometimes to others. I
listened to your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/30/07 18:11, Seth Goodman wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 5:50 PM -0500:
And the counter argument would be that not-munging-Reply-To has
always been popular amongst people who know what they are doing.
Most people who
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 22:06:45 -0500
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 03/30/07 18:11, Seth Goodman wrote:
Most people who know what they're doing don't insist that the
rest of the world changes its behavior on something that is not
important.
We're not insisting that other MLs
44 matches
Mail list logo
