Re: [Evolution] Reply-To Question

[Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc linuxweasel com>]

On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 20:40, Arthur S. Alexion wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 23:08, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > Replies to a couple of posts enclosed.
> >
> > On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 18:54, Arthur S. Alexion wrote: 
> > > On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 19:37, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 12:27, Arthur S. Alexion wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 14:36, Ray Hunter wrote:
> > > > > > I would like the reply-to field to populate to the list email
> > > > > > address...is this possible?
> > > > >
> > > > > So would I, but we seem to be in the minority.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think it should do this by default.  You can always fill in the
> > > > list as the reply-to by hand.  I'm not convinced that adding this as an
> > > > option is worthwhile.  (mind you, I'm not actually an Evolution hacker,
> > > > but I try to keep up with it pretty closely).
> > >
> > > See what I mean...
> >
> > No, I'm afraid that I don't.
>
> To Ray Hunter, I meant that your reply confirmed that Ray and I were in
> the minority in wanting to reply to list by default.

Actually, having it reply to the list by default would be just fine. 
Having it set the reply-to field to default seems a bit strange.

> > > >  Furthermore, the existing code to make 'reply-to-list'
> > > > work is horrible and hacky.  I haven't found a 'good' solution for this
> > > > yet (although it's been suggested that I look at the gnus code.  I hope
> > > > to get there soon).  This is one of those problems that appears HARD to
> > > > solve.
> > >
> > > I don't know.  I subscribe to about 8 lists and only 2 of the 8 work
> > > like this one.  The other (hosted by ultraviolet.org) is the worst
> >
> > You mean like the Evolution list?  I wasn't talking about how the
> > mailing list manager handles it, this is completely unrelated to
> > Evolution.
>
> No. this is a list manager configuration issue.  It has nothing to do
> with evolution or any other mail client.  It is, however exacerbated by
> evolution since some mail clients make replies to list easier.  (In mutt
> and kmail, you just hit the letter L.)

No?  You just agreed with me, it's a mailing list manager configuration
issue.  If you want keybindings, update the bug that I referenced in my
first reply.

> > > > > - reply to all means original poster gets two copies.  Why?
> > > >
> > > > It doesn't.  I think you're missing out on some common use-cases.  There
> > > > are many mailing lists out there which do not require you to be a member
> > > > of the list before posting.  That is to say, reply-to-all only results
> > > > in the sender getting two copies of the mail if they're not on the
> > > > list.  Removing the sender on 'reply-to-all' is a BAD idea.
> > >
> > > You're kidding, right?
> >
> > No.  I don't understand what your confusion is, please clarify.
>
> Almost every time I post to this list, I get duplicate replies.  It's
> annoying and a waste of bandwidth.  Some lists even give you the option
> of not receiving copies of your own posts since they are likely in your
> sent mail folder anyway (I don't usually activate this option since I
> like to know that my post made it to the list, but I can see the
> efficiency in selecting it.)

That's because people use reply-to-all instead of reply-to-list, and
because the list is (probably) open to non-subscribers posting.  Part of
it is that people really are too lazy to use the menus to get to reply
to list, but there's a bug filed about it, hopefully it will be fixed in
the release after the port of Evolution to GNOME 2.  In the mean time,
there's nothing that you can do about it (except perhaps provide some
more feedback that having the Reply-to-list more accessible in the UI is
an important feature).
        Greg

-- 
Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc linuxweasel com>