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

[Patrick O'Callaghan <poc usb ve>]

On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 16:57 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 11:15 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 16:09 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 18:42 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > And there are probably an equal number who believe the contrary, like
> > > > me, but let's not argue about it. I think Paul's suggestion that the
> > > > default behaviour for "Reply Publicly" be configurable in a similar way
> > > > to Forward is a good solution here. 
> > >
> > > How's this?
>
> I think the list ate my reply with the image attachment -- just as well
> I Cc'd you directly. :)
>
> For the record, it was: http://david.woodhou.se/evo-group-reply.png
>
> > Very nice. This would fit well with my recent (second revised) proposal
> > in place of the Reply To List button.
> >
> > I feel we're approaching a consensus. Let's hope it isn't asymptotic :-)
>
> OK, I've pushed what I have so far, since I think we're fairly much
> agreed. There may be more tweaks we can make, but this is progress.
>
> What I've pushed is:
>
>  - Three nag pop-ups:
>       - Replying to all, to many (15+) recipients
>       - Replying privately to list mail
>       - Mailing list is hijacking private mail with Reply-To:
>
>  - Option to ignore Reply-To: where it matches List-Post:
>
>  - 'Group Reply' button with drop-down menu like the 'Forward' one,
>    with its default action configurable for list/all.
>
>  - Memory leak fixes (which I need to back port to gnome-2-30)

Perhaps the "reply to all" nag could have a configurable threshold, but
it's no big deal.

Otherwise, I'm in agreement. I'm not sure how we proceed from here (if
there are no objections). Does Matthew now take over?

Perhaps you should post your detailed proposal (including an explanation
of the nags) to the BZ page to make it more "official" (and more likely
to be seen by the Evo devels).

poc