RetroSearch Browse

Tue Oct 7 11:01:23 EDT 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038565.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?
>> 
[snip]
> 
> 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?
> -Barry

+1

-- 
Kenny Pitt

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038565.html below:

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