[sf-lug] Ubuntu release ("back on-list" sub thread)
rick at linuxmafia.com
Sun Apr 27 15:22:23 PDT 2008
Quoting Ernest De Leon (edeleonjr at gmail.com):
> This is something I have wondered about....why when using reply, it only has
> rick's address, and reply all puts in that of the list...other lists that I
> am on have the list email address as the default 'reply to' address.
> Is there a way to fix this?
1. The "Reply" command reaches just the sender.
2. "Reply-to-All" reaches the sender plus his/her other addresses.
You should always use Reply-to-All when responding to ongoing mailing
list threads. Use Reply _only_ when you have some compelling reason to
depart from the mailing list into private mail (and then please do
explain your sudden insistence on having a private discussion with
someone who thought he/she was participating in a public one).
Individual MUAs (Mail User Agents, i.e., user e-mail programs) will
differ in the names they give to those two reply modes.
My headers on this posting (above) demonstrate the legitimate,
RFC-specified, use of the Reply-To: header, like this:
Reply-To: rick at unixmercenary.net
That says that I request that any direct replies to me as sender should
go to an alternate mailbox. One of the _lesser_ drawbacks of munging
("forcing") the field to perform an unintended role at the mailing list
manager level is that it interferes in the field's legitimate function.
It also has (much) worse drawbacks.
More information about the sf-lug