From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OUd3y-0007hk-Rx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:01:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F1ED1E0BD8; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 10:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D29CDE0BD8 for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 10:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832C11B40AD for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 10:01:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.532 required=5.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j-biERmvShdg for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 10:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BED02AC08F for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 10:01:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUd3d-00088x-DW for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:01:17 +0200 Received: from 81.193.61.249 ([81.193.61.249]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:01:17 +0200 Received: from nunojsilva by 81.193.61.249 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:01:17 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: nunojsilva@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Mailing list policy on reply Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 11:01:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87k4petd7e.fsf@ist.utl.pt> References: <20100702005433.GK9344@vidovic> <4C2D5D5D.6010109@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org Cc: nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.193.61.249 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:2CvzTsoNK4dyLBx9fxKGx2nECi4= X-Archives-Salt: 429b772a-b051-486c-babd-e28745f994fe X-Archives-Hash: be8a13e7abb5672b0ab0c8b8b55d70b7 Dale writes: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> On 2010-07-02, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: >> >> >>> I'm often stucked by the current policy in this mailing list changing >>> the 'Reply-To' header to the mailing list address. Most mailing >>> lists I use don't do that. >>> >>> It is usually better and prefer the "answer to all" policy as it >>> permit to be notified of an answer without having to track the whole >>> mailing list. >>> >>> What do you think about changing of policy? Like others, I'm happy with this as it is. But YMMV. > When they start a new list and it is not set up this way, it causes > confusion. This was discussed before on another list. I don't see > this changing anytime soon and hope it doesn't. Is there a way for someone to add another address to Reply-To? (Does the list management software overwrite the header or just appends its address?) Such a way would suit the OP and people who don't want duplicate messages at the same time. Meanwhile the OP might want to add a request to be CC'ed to his signature. -- Nuno J. Silva gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg