Reinhard Nissl wrote:
Hi,
Anssi Hannula wrote:
I'm pleased to announce bugfix release 0.7.1:
http://home.vr-web.de/~rnissl/vdr-xine-0.7.1.tgzAre you planning to add support for socket connections as proposed by Patrick Boettcher anytime soon?
We already had a discussion about that. He is currently working on a "cleaner" approach (just one server side socket and only two sockets at client side) and that one will be integrated into vdr-xine-0.8.0.
By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml configuration has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also, use the "reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml configuration has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also, use the "reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Klaus
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml configuration has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also, use the "reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Well, by default VDR ml does appear to *not* send those messages twice (check new options at http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr).
Additionally, if you want to receive list-only replies, couldn't you add your own reply-to header?
Majority of my subscribed lists also have this behaviour.
Still, I believe you (as the author of VDR) have the power to change the configuration so that the ml sets the reply-to again.
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml
configuration
has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also, use
the
"reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Well, by default VDR ml does appear to *not* send those messages twice (check new options at http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr).
It's not the ML software that would send them twice - it's each user's mail client!
Additionally, if you want to receive list-only replies, couldn't you add your own reply-to header?
Majority of my subscribed lists also have this behaviour.
Still, I believe you (as the author of VDR) have the power to change the configuration so that the ml sets the reply-to again.
I have no influence on the mailing list software. The MLs are hosted on linuxtv.org, which I have nothing to do with.
Klaus
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml
configuration
has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also,
use the
"reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Well, by default VDR ml does appear to *not* send those messages twice (check new options at http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr).
It's not the ML software that would send them twice - it's each user's mail client!
But the ML sees the headers of the message, and does not deliver the message to the subscribed address if it is already in the To: header.
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml
configuration
has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also,
use the
"reply to all" function of your email reader.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Well, by default VDR ml does appear to *not* send those messages twice (check new options at http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr).
It's not the ML software that would send them twice - it's each user's mail client!
But the ML sees the headers of the message, and does not deliver the message to the subscribed address if it is already in the To: header.
Well, if that's the case then all should be fine.
Klaus
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
[snip]
It's not the ML software that would send them twice - it's each user's mail client!
But the ML sees the headers of the message, and does not deliver the message to the subscribed address if it is already in the To: header.
Well, if that's the case then all should be fine.
That depends on whether your mail software respects the List-Post header.
I for one, despite preferring list-only, would rather see two copies than one copy because the list software decided not to send a message to me because my address was mentioned in the To: or Cc: headers.
Darren Salt wrote:
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
[snip]
It's not the ML software that would send them twice - it's each user's mail client!
But the ML sees the headers of the message, and does not deliver the message to the subscribed address if it is already in the To: header.
Well, if that's the case then all should be fine.
That depends on whether your mail software respects the List-Post header.
I for one, despite preferring list-only, would rather see two copies than one copy because the list software decided not to send a message to me because my address was mentioned in the To: or Cc: headers.
You can change the behaviour here: http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 01:59:28PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice.
If you use something like procmail, just add :
:0 Whc: msgid.lock | formail -D 4096 .msgid.cache
Grégoire Favre wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 01:59:28PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice.
If you use something like procmail, just add :
:0 Whc: msgid.lock | formail -D 4096 .msgid.cache
Woulnd't it just be easier to send replies *only* to the ML? After all, the original sender _is_ subscribed to the list!
Ok, let's not waste time on this discussion that has been done several times before...
Klaus
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 14:32 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Grégoire Favre wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 01:59:28PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice.
If you use something like procmail, just add :
:0 Whc: msgid.lock | formail -D 4096 .msgid.cache
Woulnd't it just be easier to send replies *only* to the ML? After all, the original sender _is_ subscribed to the list!
Ok, let's not waste time on this discussion that has been done several times before...
Indeed, http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html
Personally, I find adding a reply-to header to be preferable though.
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Anssi Hannula wrote:
... By the way, your message didn't go to mailinglist. VDR ml configuration has changed so if you want to send message to mailinglist also, use the "reply to all" function of your email reader.
I noticed a change when a lot of messages ended up in the wrong folder here. The List-Id header had already been changed once this weekend, and I'd changed my filters to cope with that, then it was changed again...
If your mail software respects List-Post, followup should work regardless.
This kind of configuration is commonly used in mailinglists.
If "reply to all" is used, the original sender would receive both the direct reply and a copy from the ML - not very desirable :-(
Personally I *hate* it when I get the same message twice. The messages should really have a "reply-to" header that directs any reply to the ML.
Absolutely NOT - that breaks private reply. Use Mail-Followup-To.
-
Anssi Hannula -
Darren Salt -
Grégoire Favre -
Klaus Schmidinger -
Torgeir Veimo