dfs 01/07/10 21:23:43
Modified: xdocs/site mail.xml
docs/site mail.html
Log:
Added blurb indicating that Reply-To debates should not be brought up
on mailing lists with pointers to opposing viewpoints.
Revision Changes Path
1.16 +12 -1 jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/mail.xml
Index: mail.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/xdocs/site/mail.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -r1.15 -r1.16
--- mail.xml 2001/03/02 19:19:12 1.15
+++ mail.xml 2001/07/11 04:23:41 1.16
@@ -97,7 +97,18 @@
and not to the original author directly. The reason is because it helps
facilitate discussion on the list for everyone to benefit from. Be careful
of this as sometimes you may intend to reply to a message directly to someone
-instead of the entire list.
+instead of the entire list.
+<em>
+The appropriate contents of the Reply-To header is an age-old debate that
+should not be brought up on the mailing lists. You can
+examine opposing points of view
+<a href="http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html";>condemning</a>
+our convention and
+<a href="http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml";>
+condoning</a>
+it. Bringing this up for debate on a mailing list will add nothing
+new and is considered off-topic.
+</em>
</p>
<p>
1.34 +12 -1 jakarta-site2/docs/site/mail.html
Index: mail.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-site2/docs/site/mail.html,v
retrieving revision 1.33
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -r1.33 -r1.34
--- mail.html 2001/07/10 02:06:54 1.33
+++ mail.html 2001/07/11 04:23:42 1.34
@@ -210,7 +210,18 @@
and not to the original author directly. The reason is because it helps
facilitate discussion on the list for everyone to benefit from. Be careful
of this as sometimes you may intend to reply to a message directly to someone
-instead of the entire list.
+instead of the entire list.
+<em>
+The appropriate contents of the Reply-To header is an age-old debate that
+should not be brought up on the mailing lists. You can
+examine opposing points of view
+<a href="http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html";>condemning</a>
+our convention and
+<a href="http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml";>
+condoning</a>
+it. Bringing this up for debate on a mailing list will add nothing
+new and is considered off-topic.
+</em>
</p>
<p>
<strong>
