Re: [Evolution] Reply for list messages should go back to the list

The operation *does*. You're getting confused by the fact that the
current menu items get disabled when you're not looking at a list

But actually, some lists don't have a List-Post: header. If there are
*any* List-* headers, you'll see the list operations get enabled, and
then you'll see quite clearly that the reply-to-list operation falls
back to replying to all. Even without having to look at the source or
take my word for it.

I'm not entirely convinced that this is indeed the case.  I've just
crafted some messages and as far as I can see only if there is a
List-Post: header is the Reply-to-list active in any way 

The Reply-to-list option (and other list submenu) should be active if
any of these match (see camel/camel-mime-utils.c):

        { "List-Post", "[ \t]*<mailto:([^@>]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "List-Id", "[^<]*<([^\\.>]+)\\.?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "Mailing-List", "[ \t]*list ([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>;]*)" },
        { "Originator", "[ \t]*([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "X-Mailing-List", "[ \t]*<?([^@>]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "X-Loop", "[ \t]*([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "X-List", "[ \t]*([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "Sender", "[ \t]*owner-([^ ]+)@?([^ @\n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "Sender", "[ \t]*([^ ]+)-owner ?([^ @\n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "Delivered-To", "[ \t]*mailing list ([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "Return-Path", "[ \t]*<?owner-([^@>]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "X-BeenThere", "[ \t]*([^ ]+)@?([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },
        { "List-Unsubscribe", "<mailto:(.+)-unsubscribe@([^ \n\t\r>]*)" },

OK. So it's not just any List-*: header, there's a specific list of
headers it needs (with specific formats in some cases).  Fine, that
explains why my test didn't work.  Thanks for explaining it.

I'd send you the same messages to test, but ISTR your mail software is
broken and would silently delete both of them because it thinks it's
already seen them?

(I say "broken" because of all the fun I can have with it. I can send
messages to the list that I know your system will delete without you
seeing them -- and I when I am directly Cc'd on messages which were also
sent to the list, I can quickly send you a different message with the
same Message-Id:, thus ensuring that you never receive the real list
message :)

No, I think you got the wrong end of the stick on this - it's not my
mail software that only lets me see one version, I only ever get sent
one version by the mailing list software because it tries to remove
duplicates and if it sees my name on the CC: or To: list, it doesn't
send me the list copy.  On other mailing lists I get multiple copies
without any problems.

The only time I use Reply-to-all on list messages rather than
Reply-to-list is when there are multiple lists involved - obviously any
particular message only has one List-Post: header, so in order to send a
message to multiple lists I need to use Reply-all.  I also make sure I
edit out any superfluous CC: entries.

That's what I was looking for; thanks. Do you do this often enough that
you really want a third toolbar button, and the existing drop-down
choice on the 'Group Reply' button isn't sufficient?

I don't know - I don't have an install of 2.30.x that I have used
sufficiently often to know how usable the drop down list paradigm is in
this context.

But as I have said a few times, this isn't really about my usability - I
have been using Evo with lists for enough years now that my muscle
memory will probably continue using ctrl-L no matter what.  What I would
like is for the Reply-to-List to be more prominent to encourage people
to use that rather than just blindly replying to the user. In my naivety
I thought the simplest way would be to just add a Reply-to-list button
on the toolbar 


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