Roger, in future, please reply to the list (and cc me if you want). AllThought I had ;-)
replies to list messages should appear on the list to help those who may
be having the same problem.
Normally hitting reply does the trick.
Maybe the machine I used for that reply behaves differently I will check.
I don't wnat to upset anyone bacause I'm going to be needing help before long.
It's not your fault. It's the fault of the list admins.
Mailing list software can be set so that the Reply-to: header is set to the list address, so that clicking 'Reply', as you and just about everyone else on Earth would do, sends the message back to the list. But there is a group of people who feel that doing so violates some sacred tenet of the internet, and the result is a mailing list where replies go to the individual, unless the sender remembers to treat this email differently than all his/her other email.
There are arguments for both the "don't change the Reply-to:" school ( http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html ) and the "point the Reply-to: to the list" school ( http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml ). But as a software designer, these arguments are not persuasive. The default behavior for any system should be the action that is most likely to be carried out. For a mailing list, whose goal is the sharing of information, that behavior is to reply to the list.
I host several popular lists, and subscribe to over a dozen others. I have never seen anyone complain about how a reply is sent on lists for which Reply-to: is set to the list, whereas this matter has come up on every single list that doesn't set Reply-to: to the list.
___/
/
__/
/
____/
Ed LeafeLinux Love: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umount;sleep
_______________________________________________ wine-users mailing list wine-users@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
