On 02/17/2013 09:52 PM, drew Roberts wrote: > On Sunday 17 February 2013 11:49:06 Joe Hartley wrote: >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:36:46 +0800 >> >> Simon Wise <simonzwise@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 18/02/13 00:22, Len Ovens wrote: >>>> On Sun, February 17, 2013 4:00 am, Chris Bannister wrote: >>>>> [No need to include me in the reply, I'm subscribed to the list] >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, this list does not add a replyto: field so the only way >>>> of getting things to the list is with reply all.... or spend time >>>> messing with all the header fields. >>> >>> I thought most email clients have supported reply-to-list based on >>> List-id for ages? >> >> It's not so much the mail client as the list settings and the headers it >> adds to the email (though some clients are broken with regards to this). >> >> For me, using the Sylpheed client, a simple reply comes back to the list, >> while a reply-all goes to the sender with a cc: to the list, which would >> cause the original sender to get the message twice. When replying to a >> list, you hardly ever want to reply-all. > > Nor mally, a simple reply works for me but for some posts, a reply just goes > back to the sender. All "replies" should to the sender only. The lists.linuxaudio.org does not munge the headers. It's up to you and your MUA. > For those, if I catch them, I start again with a > reply-all and delete all but the list normally. When I don't catch it, I end > up sending driect and not to the list. In those cases, I hopefully catch it > later and send again to the list the second time. > > I have not investigated if this occurs when people cc the list instead of > having the mail sent to the list. http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
