Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: David Shakaryan <omp@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [gentoo-project] Reply to setting Was: Improving developer/user communication]
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 09:50:41
Message-Id: 46A1D6E0.6040108@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [Fwd: [gentoo-project] Reply to setting Was: Improving developer/user communication] by Neil Bothwick
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> You can do that anyway, with Reply to Sender. Since the whole point of a > list like this is for open discussion, the default should be for replies > to go to the list. It is different for, say, an announce list. The other > Gentoo discussion lists have Reply-To set so omitting it from here seems > more like an omission than policy.
I agree with this post completely. Omitting a Reply-To header in this list results in less consistency amongst the mailing lists. If someone is accustomed to most of the other Gentoo mailing lists having a Reply-To header, it would be quite likely for them not to realise that this list is different in that regard. Look at cokehabit for a real life example of this. Neil also has a great point with the fact that this list is for open discussion, and thus the default should be for mail being sent to the list, rather than the sender alone. It would not be difficult for people to click 'Reply to All', but it also would not be difficult for the infra team to set a Reply-To header. I would recommend adding a Reply-To header to this list, if only for the sake of consistency. -- David Shakaryan -- gentoo-project@g.o mailing list

Replies