RetroSearch Browse

Tue Oct 7 08:44:53 EDT 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038563.html

Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 07:41, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> 
>>    Greg> On 06 October 2003, Skip Montanaro said:
>>    >> Maybe the Reply-To: for spambayes-checkins should be spambayes-dev
>>    >> (and similarly for python-checkins/python-dev).  Can that be
>>    >> engineered through Mailman?
>>
>>    Greg> Yes -- it's on the "General Options" page.  Look for
>>    Greg> reply_goes_to_list.
>>
>>After seeing your answer I know I asked the wrong question. <wink> I
>>shouldn't have said "Reply-To:".  In X?Emacs/VM, I just hit the 'f' key to
>>reply to you and to cc spambayes-dev.  Had this been a spambayes-checkins
>>message, it would have been nice if the cc went to spambayes-dev instead of
>>spambayes-checkin.
>>
>>I can probably solve that for myself by tweaking the vm-followup command
>>(what the 'f' key is bound to), but there's probably not a general solution.
>>Setting Reply-To: *might* be okay in a situation like this where you don't
>>want chit-chat on a checkins list to get lost or not seen by the larger
>>audience, but I'd only use it as a last resort.
> 
> 
> IMO as an anti-Reply-to munger, I think this is one situation where
> Reply-To hacking is perfectly legit.  You don't want discussions on
> -checkins, you want them on the discuss mailing list (in this case
> spambayes-dev).  MM2.1 can be configured to retain any existing Reply-To
> fields so people who have to set this to worm around their broken mail
> systems can still be coddled.
> 
> python-devers and spambayes-devers, you vant I should do dis?

+1

-- 
Sjoerd Mullender <sjoerd at acm.org>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038563.html below:

[spambayes-dev] spambayes-checkins -> spambayes-dev, python-checkins -> python-dev