Reinhard Nissl 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.
Anssi Hannula wrote:
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:
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.
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Anssi Hannula wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
[snip]
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:
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:
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:
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...
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