Thread: reply to setting

reply to setting

From
Kenneth Gonsalves
Date:
hi,
any reason why the default reply-to on this list should not be set to the 
list? I keep replying to postings only to find later that the reply goes to 
the OP and not to the list. reply-all button results in needless duplication
-- 
regards
kg

http://www.onlineindianhotels.net - fastest hotel search website in the world
http://www.ootygolfclub.org


Re: reply to setting

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com> writes:
> any reason why the default reply-to on this list should not be set to the 
> list? I keep replying to postings only to find later that the reply goes to 
> the OP and not to the list. reply-all button results in needless duplication

It works fine for the rest of us.  Fix your mail software.
        regards, tom lane


Re: reply to setting

From
Bruno Wolff III
Date:
On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 09:33:08 +0530, Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com> wrote:
> hi,
> any reason why the default reply-to on this list should not be set to the 
> list? I keep replying to postings only to find later that the reply goes to 
> the OP and not to the list. reply-all button results in needless duplication

The duplication is needless. Direct replies very often get to the recipient
faster than ones sent through the lists. It is also possible that the direct
replies might be handled differently by the recipient (e.g. a filter may put
them in different folders).

Recipients that prefer not to get separate copies can indicate that desire
by including an appropiate mail-followup-to header.


Re: reply to setting

From
Joe Conway
Date:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 09:33:08 +0530,
>   Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com> wrote:
>>any reason why the default reply-to on this list should not be set to the 
>>list? I keep replying to postings only to find later that the reply goes to 
>>the OP and not to the list. reply-all button results in needless duplication
> 
> The duplication is needless. Direct replies very often get to the recipient                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   is *not* needless?
 

> faster than ones sent through the lists. It is also possible that the direct
> replies might be handled differently by the recipient (e.g. a filter may put
> them in different folders).

This is very true. In fact, I get mildly annoyed when people *don't* 
include the direct reply to me, because I very actively filter/redirect 
my mail. Replies directly to me are pretty much guaranteed to be seen 
quickly, but the ones that go to the list might get lost among the 
hundreds of posts that go into my "postgres" inbox every day. I think 
many other people do something similar.

> Recipients that prefer not to get separate copies can indicate that desire
> by including an appropiate mail-followup-to header.

Also true.

Joe


Re: reply to setting

From
Rod Taylor
Date:
> > faster than ones sent through the lists. It is also possible that the direct
> > replies might be handled differently by the recipient (e.g. a filter may put
> > them in different folders).
> 
> This is very true. In fact, I get mildly annoyed when people *don't* 
> include the direct reply to me, because I very actively filter/redirect 

If you don't want duplicates, send an email to majordomo@postgresql.org
with the following command (or something similar to this anyway):
set pgsql-hackers eliminatecc

Whenever you're in the To: or Cc: headers, the list will not send you a
copy of the message -- so you only receive it once.





Re: reply to setting

From
Bruno Wolff III
Date:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 13:45:21 -0700, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >
> >The duplication is needless. Direct replies very often get to the recipient
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                  is *not* needless?

Yeah, I made a typo.


Re: reply to setting

From
Greg Stark
Date:
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:

> This is very true. In fact, I get mildly annoyed when people *don't* include
> the direct reply to me, because I very actively filter/redirect my mail.
> Replies directly to me are pretty much guaranteed to be seen quickly, but the
> ones that go to the list might get lost among the hundreds of posts that go
> into my "postgres" inbox every day. I think many other people do something
> similar.

Just as a side comment, one trick I found very helpful in my mail filters is
to treat any message with one of my message-ids in the references as a
personal message as far as mail notifications. This way I get notifications
for any message on a thread following a post of my own.

This is easy in Gnus since the message id has the sending hostname and also
the first few characters has a base64 encoded copy of the unix userid. You
would have to figure out how to recognize message-ids from your MUA.


-- 
greg



Re: reply to setting

From
Joe Conway
Date:
Greg Stark wrote:
> Just as a side comment, one trick I found very helpful in my mail filters is
> to treat any message with one of my message-ids in the references as a
> personal message as far as mail notifications. This way I get notifications
> for any message on a thread following a post of my own.

Interesting idea -- thanks!

Joe