1 |
Robert Buchholz wrote: |
2 |
> On Saturday, 21. July 2007 02:37, Dale wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> Is it just me or is the reply to function not working on this list |
5 |
>> yet? When I hit reply to, it appears that it is not going to the |
6 |
>> list but to the person that sent the message I am replying too. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> Oh, I did this as a forward since asking just George may not do any |
9 |
>> good. Sorry if this messes up the headers or something. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
> |
12 |
> This list does not have "reply to munging" enabled, meaning the Reply-To |
13 |
> will not be set to the list address for you. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> On some reasons why that often is a good idea, read the |
16 |
> article "Reply-To Munging Considered Harmful" [1]. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> Please use the "Reply to all" or "Reply to list" features of your |
19 |
> mailer, they all have either of those if not both. Please do not use |
20 |
> forwarding. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Also, you could write some procmail rule (if applicable) to reset the |
23 |
> Reply-To for your incoming mail, see [2] for details. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> -R. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> |
28 |
> [1] http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html |
29 |
> [2] |
30 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/infrastructure/reply-to.xml#doc_chap1_sect3 |
31 |
> |
32 |
|
33 |
Well, I use Seamonkey for my email. The thing I don't like about the |
34 |
reply all is that now you get two copies of this email. I figured that |
35 |
because I got two of yours. I do not see a reply to list function so |
36 |
can you assist me in finding that or does it not exist in Seamonkey. |
37 |
|
38 |
Also, did they not set this up the same way as the other lists? When I |
39 |
hit reply in gentoo-user it works fine as far as going to the list |
40 |
itself. I was just thinking that maybe someone missed a step when the |
41 |
mailing list was set up. |
42 |
|
43 |
Any help would be appreciated. |
44 |
|
45 |
Dale |
46 |
|
47 |
:-) :-) |