On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 12:04 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> > Right, it's part of the development version. To be released in
> > 3.30.0+.
>
> Oh ok, I’m still under Debian stable so I probably don’t have access
> to it…
Hi,
the 3.30.0 stable version of evolution is to-be-released late
On 2018-05-30 at 08:47, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 03:04 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
>> I didn’t understand… you receive the message then, right?
>
> Yes, but not from the list.
Hmm… that’s why I don’t like a such configuration, a such proper
handling would require to store som
Hi,
On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 03:04 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> Should we cross-post to evolution-list
Cross-posting is considered bad too. You can just start new
conversation there.
> ...to that private mailing list from the outside, ...
Right, private and public mailing lists can h
On 2018-05-29 at 10:06, Milan Crha wrote:
> By the way, this particular question belongs to evolution-list, rather
> than to evolution-hackers. The later is for coders, while you are
> discussing user functions. Not a big deal, just saying.
Should we cross-post to evolution-list, then stop posting
On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 02:48 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> (not the same thing as a thread may change
> topic by having one of its participant changing its subject line)
Hi
off topic:
a) I'm replying intentionally to the list
b) I'm talking to you, the person written at the very first
Le 29/05/2018 à 01h35, Ángel a écrit :
> On 2018-05-28 at 23:21 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
>> On 2018-05-28 at 15:40, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> > Reply-To-List is the only option anyone should ever use, IMNSHO. Doing
>> > anything else is bad netiquette.
>>
>> Really? When beginning fir
On 2018-05-28 at 23:21 +0200, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> On 2018-05-28 at 15:40, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> > Reply-To-List is the only option anyone should ever use, IMNSHO. Doing
> > anything else is bad netiquette.
>
> Really? When beginning first to use mailing lists I was curious about
>
On 2018-05-28 at 15:40, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> “reply in private to the list, outside of the knowledge of eventual
>> participants). The problem here is “reply to the list” is not the
>> canonical standard thing most people will want to do, it is just the
>> complementary opposite of “reply
> “reply in private to the list, outside of the knowledge of eventual
> participants). The problem here is “reply to the list” is not the
> canonical standard thing most people will want to do, it is just the
> complementary opposite of “reply privately to the sender”: “reply
> privately to the lis
Hi,
Recently I missed a mail, for only some days fortunately, but knowing
myself I might have missed a lot more this way: this mail was an answer
on a mailing list, to a mail I sent there, and it didn’t include me in
either the “To:” nor the “Cc:” header, thought the user (whose
user-agent^Wx-mail
10 matches
Mail list logo
