Message-ID: <4900B39B.2040508@kkmfg.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:25:47 -0400
From: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Annoying Reply-To
References: <200810231701.m9NH1ML21995@momjian.us>
In-Reply-To: <200810231701.m9NH1ML21995@momjian.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> Mikkel is right, every other well-organized mailing list I've ever been on 
>> handles things the sensible way he suggests, but everybody on his side 
>> who's been on lists here for a while already knows this issue is a dead 
>> horse.  Since I use the most advanced e-mail client on the market I just 
>> work around that the settings here are weird, it does annoy me a bit 
>> anytime I stop to think about it though.
>>     
>
> I think this is the crux of the problem --- if I subscribed to multiple
> email lists, and some have "rely" going to the list and some have
> "reply" going to the author, I would have to think about the right reply
> option every time I send email.
>
> Fortunately, every email list I subscribe to and manage behaves like the
> Postgres lists.
>
>   

I find it difficult to believe that every list you subscribe to behaves 
as the Postgres list does. Not that I'm doubting you, just that it's 
difficult given that the PG list is the ONLY list I've ever been on to 
use Reply as just replying to the author. Every other list I've ever 
seen has reply as the list address and requires Reply All to reply to 
the original poster. Thus, I would fall into the category of people who 
have to think hard in order to do the correct thing when posting to this 
list.

I've checked and I can't even find an option to make Thunderbird (the 
client I use in windows) reply to the list properly with the reply 
button (it just cannot be set that way.) You must use Reply All. You 
might say that that makes Thunderbird crippled but I see it more as a 
sign that nobody outside of a few fussy RFC worshipping types would ever 
want the behavior of the Postgre list. Yes, I'll have to live with the 
current behavior. Yes, it's an RFC standard. But, even after having 
heard the arguments I'm not convinced that this list's behavior is 
desirable. YMMV.