[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [OT] List concerns and dieas (was Re: [linux-lvm] next step ofrecovering from tha vgchange problem)



On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Mark van Walraven wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:18:11PM +0100, Friedrich Lobenstock wrote:
> > Leave this on. Most mails are to be mailed to the list anyway. It's
> > annoying if you'd alway needed to use the reply-to-all feature of your
> > mail client and then delete the original sender address to keep the
> > mail on the list and not sending the original sender two mails. I'm
>
> In my opinion, an annoying mail client is not reason to break the 'reply'
> function for people with sensible clients.

In one or the other aspect each mail client is broken - this world is
not perfect. I couldnt' find the ultimate one. One might be good at
this filtering duplicate message-ids but it might be totaly crap when
it comes to user-interface, IMAP4, and and and....YMMV


> I strongly oppose reply-to munging.

I strongly advocate reply-to munging on this list. Period

-- 
MfG / Regards
Friedrich Lobenstock




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]