pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedAnnoying Reply-To
57+ messages / 29 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 11:02 Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
0 siblings, 3 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Mikkel Høgh @ 2008-10-17 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tomasz Ostrowski <tometzky@batory.org.pl>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
> On 2008-10-17 12:13, Mikkel Høgh wrote:
>
>>> You're supposed to use "Reply to all" if you want to reply to the
>>> list.
>>
>> Well, I think the most common use case for a mailing list is to reply
>> back to the list, isn't that the whole point?
>
> It is a point of having "Reply to all" button. With "reply-to" is it
> hard to reply to one person, easy to reply to the list. Without it
> it is
> both easy.
But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only? That
is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-list
replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not sent
back to the mailing list.
>
>> Personally I find it annoying that I get two copies of each reply to
>> one of my posts, one that is filtered into the mailinglist folder
>> because it has the correct X-Mailing-List header and the other just
>> sits there in my inbox, wasting both bandwidth and disk space in the
>> process.
>
> So set reply-to in messages you send by yourself - it will be honored.
Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing the
work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
>
>
>> Besides, the if the Reply-To thing is so dangerous, why do most other
>> mailing lists do it?
>
> for i in Windows MySQL IE Sweets Alcohol etc.; do
> echo "If using $i is so dangerous, why do most do it?"
> done
Well, my point is that Reply-To: is only dangerous if you're not
careful. Not so with the other examples you mention :)
If you're writing something important, private and/or confidential,
don't you always check before you send? You'd better, because a small
typo when you selected the recipient might mean that you're sending
love-letters to your boss or something like that :)=
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 1.9K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 11:20 Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Bill Moran @ 2008-10-17 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>
> On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
>
> > On 2008-10-17 12:13, Mikkel Høgh wrote:
> >
> >>> You're supposed to use "Reply to all" if you want to reply to the
> >>> list.
> >>
> >> Well, I think the most common use case for a mailing list is to reply
> >> back to the list, isn't that the whole point?
> >
> > It is a point of having "Reply to all" button. With "reply-to" is it
> > hard to reply to one person, easy to reply to the list. Without it
> > it is
> > both easy.
>
> But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only? That
> is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-list
> replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not sent
> back to the mailing list.
You're forgetting the cost of a mistake in that case.
As it stands, if you hit reply when you meant reply-to, oops, resend.
If it's changed and you hit reply when you want to send a private message
to the poster, you just broadcast your private message to the world.
> Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing the
> work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
Don't be an asshole. There's no need for that kind of cynicism.
> Well, my point is that Reply-To: is only dangerous if you're not
> careful. Not so with the other examples you mention :)
But as it is now, it's not dangerous at all.
> If you're writing something important, private and/or confidential,
> don't you always check before you send? You'd better, because a small
> typo when you selected the recipient might mean that you're sending
> love-letters to your boss or something like that :)
I'd rather know that the computer had my back in the case of an error,
instead of it helping me mindlessly even when I'm doing the wrong thing.
To me, that's also the difference between MySQL and PostgreSQL.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
wmoran@collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 11:48 Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Mikkel Høgh @ 2008-10-17 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On 17/10/2008, at 13.20, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>
>>
>> On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
>>
>> But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only? That
>> is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-list
>> replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not sent
>> back to the mailing list.
>
> You're forgetting the cost of a mistake in that case.
>
> As it stands, if you hit reply when you meant reply-to, oops, resend.
>
> If it's changed and you hit reply when you want to send a private
> message
> to the poster, you just broadcast your private message to the world.
And again, how often does this happen? How often do people write
really sensitive e-mails based on messages on pgsql-general.
Because if we wanted to be really safe, we should not even send the
mailing-list address along, so even if someone used the reply-all
button, he could not accidentally post his private e-mail on the web.
In true McDonalds-style, we could change the mailing-list-address to
be pgsql-general-if-you-send-to-this-your-private-information-will-be-posted-on-the-internet@postgresql.org
How far are you willing to go to protect people against themselves?
>> Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing
>> the
>> work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
>
> Don't be an asshole. There's no need for that kind of cynicism.
In my opinion, asking for sane defaults is neither cynicism or being
an asshole.
I may have put it on an edge, but having to manually add a Reply-To
header to each message I send to pgsql-general is not my idea of fun.
>
>
>> Well, my point is that Reply-To: is only dangerous if you're not
>> careful. Not so with the other examples you mention :)
>
> But as it is now, it's not dangerous at all.
No, just annoying and a waste of time, energy, bandwidth and
ultimately, money.
>
>
>> If you're writing something important, private and/or confidential,
>> don't you always check before you send? You'd better, because a small
>> typo when you selected the recipient might mean that you're sending
>> love-letters to your boss or something like that :)
>
> I'd rather know that the computer had my back in the case of an error,
> instead of it helping me mindlessly even when I'm doing the wrong
> thing.
> To me, that's also the difference between MySQL and PostgreSQL.
Well, in the above case, the computer doesn't have your back. If you
told it to send the e-mail to Marty Boss instead of Maggie Blond,
that's exactly what it'll do.
Currently, when I tell my computer to reply to a message on the pgsql
mailing list, it'll do something else, because who ever set it up
decided to cater to the 0.1% edge-case instead of just having the
default action be what it should be 99.5% of the time.
You may not care about usability or user experience, but remember that
what seems to be correct from a technical perpective is not always the
"right" thing to do.=
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 1.9K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:01 Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Bill Moran @ 2008-10-17 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>
> On 17/10/2008, at 13.20, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
> >
> >> On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
> >>
> >> But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only? That
> >> is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-list
> >> replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not sent
> >> back to the mailing list.
> >
> > You're forgetting the cost of a mistake in that case.
> >
> > As it stands, if you hit reply when you meant reply-to, oops, resend.
> >
> > If it's changed and you hit reply when you want to send a private
> > message
> > to the poster, you just broadcast your private message to the world.
>
> And again, how often does this happen? How often do people write
> really sensitive e-mails based on messages on pgsql-general.
It happens very infrequently. You're ignoring me and constantly trying
to refocus away from my real argument. The frequency is not the
justification, it's the severity that justifies it.
If we save one overworked DBA per year from endangering their job online,
I say it's worth it.
> How far are you willing to go to protect people against themselves?
Personally, I'm willing to go so far as to expect the person to think
about whether to hit reply or reply-to before sending the mail. I don't
see that as unreasonable.
> but having to manually add a Reply-To
> header to each message I send to pgsql-general is not my idea of fun.
I was not aware that Apple Mail was such a primitive email client. You
should consider switching to something that has a reply-to button. I'm
very disappointed in Apple.
> You may not care about usability or user experience, but remember that
> what seems to be correct from a technical perpective is not always the
> "right" thing to do.
As I said, consider getting a real email client if this is wasting so
much of your time. It doesn't cause me any undue effort.
Or, you could just be lonely. I think you've spent enough man hours
complaining about this to manually work around the problem for several
years, which blows your "this wastes too much of my valuable time"
argument out of the water.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
wmoran@collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:06 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2008-10-17 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; +Cc: Tomasz Ostrowski <tometzky@batory.org.pl>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mikkel_H=F8gh?= <mikkel@hoegh.org> writes:
> Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing the
> work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
Please stop wasting everyone's time with this. The list policy has
been debated adequately in the past. You are not going to change it.
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:10 Michael Glaesemann <grzm@seespotcode.net>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Michael Glaesemann @ 2008-10-17 12:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; +Cc: "\"Mikkel Høgh\"" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On Oct 17, 2008, at 8:01 , Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>>
>> but having to manually add a Reply-To
>> header to each message I send to pgsql-general is not my idea of fun.
>
> I was not aware that Apple Mail was such a primitive email client.
> You
> should consider switching to something that has a reply-to button.
> I'm
> very disappointed in Apple.
It's not. It has Reply and Reply All buttons for the clicky-clicky
folk, and keyboard shortcuts for each as well.
Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:25 Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Mikkel Høgh @ 2008-10-17 12:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
On 17/10/2008, at 14.01, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>>
>> On 17/10/2008, at 13.20, Bill Moran wrote:
>>
>>> In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>>>
>>>> On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only?
>>>> That
>>>> is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-
>>>> list
>>>> replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not
>>>> sent
>>>> back to the mailing list.
>>>
>>> You're forgetting the cost of a mistake in that case.
>>>
>>> As it stands, if you hit reply when you meant reply-to, oops,
>>> resend.
>>>
>>> If it's changed and you hit reply when you want to send a private
>>> message
>>> to the poster, you just broadcast your private message to the world.
>>
>> And again, how often does this happen? How often do people write
>> really sensitive e-mails based on messages on pgsql-general.
>
> It happens very infrequently. You're ignoring me and constantly
> trying
> to refocus away from my real argument. The frequency is not the
> justification, it's the severity that justifies it.
>
> If we save one overworked DBA per year from endangering their job
> online,
> I say it's worth it.
>
>> How far are you willing to go to protect people against themselves?
>
> Personally, I'm willing to go so far as to expect the person to think
> about whether to hit reply or reply-to before sending the mail. I
> don't
> see that as unreasonable.
Well, neither is checking whether you're sending it the right place
unreasonable. The difference here being if you have to do it each time
you're posting to the mailing list or that once in a blue moon where
there's something that should remain private.
So I respect
>
>
>> but having to manually add a Reply-To
>> header to each message I send to pgsql-general is not my idea of fun.
>
> I was not aware that Apple Mail was such a primitive email client.
> You
> should consider switching to something that has a reply-to button.
> I'm
> very disappointed in Apple.
You should read the original post. Thomas suggested "So set reply-to
in messages you send by yourself - it will be honored.". That's what
I'm talking about here, not "Reply All"-buttons (which it has, with
reasonable keyboard shortcuts, even). I can also add a "Reply-To:"
field on my composer window and even have it pre-filled for all my
outgoing email, but the features of my MUA are not point here :)
>
>
>> You may not care about usability or user experience, but remember
>> that
>> what seems to be correct from a technical perpective is not always
>> the
>> "right" thing to do.
>
> As I said, consider getting a real email client if this is wasting so
> much of your time. It doesn't cause me any undue effort.
"It's good for me, so it's good for everyone"
> Or, you could just be lonely.
I resent that you're trying to make this a personal thing.
> I think you've spent enough man hours
> complaining about this to manually work around the problem for several
> years, which blows your "this wastes too much of my valuable time"
> argument out of the water.
And it's not as much time as it is energy. I've only used this mailing-
list for a few days, and I've already had to manually resend mails to
the mailing-list several times. If I manage to save myself from that
only 5 times, i figure talking this debate has been worth it :)
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 1.9K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:33 Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Mikkel Høgh @ 2008-10-17 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On 17/10/2008, at 14.06, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mikkel_H=F8gh?= <mikkel@hoegh.org> writes:
>> Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing
>> the
>> work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
>
> Please stop wasting everyone's time with this. The list policy has
> been debated adequately in the past. You are not going to change it.
It is probably going to come up again every once in a while, as long
as it's not changed, but I will respect your wishes.
--
Kind regards,
Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 1.9K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:42 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sullivan @ 2008-10-17 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 01:02:57PM +0200, Mikkel Høgh wrote:
> Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing the work
> for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
My suggestion would be to use a mail user agent that knows how to read
the list headers, which were standardized many years ago. Then you
"reply to list". Mutt has done this for at least a few years now. I
don't know about other MUAs.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@commandprompt.com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:49 Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
0 siblings, 4 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Bill Moran @ 2008-10-17 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
In response to "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>:
>
> On 17/10/2008, at 14.01, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > Or, you could just be lonely.
>
> I resent that you're trying to make this a personal thing.
I was going to answer the rest of this email, then I realized that the
real problem was right here, and discussing anything else was dancing
around the issue and wasting time.
You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
you.
I'm not saying your problems aren't real, I'm just saying you're apparently
the only person in this community that has enough trouble with them to
take the time to start a discussion. To that degree, the problem is
very personal to you.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
wmoran@collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 12:56 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
3 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Frost @ 2008-10-17 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; +Cc: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
* Bill Moran (wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) wrote:
> You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> you.
Ugh. No one else is jumping in simply because we've already been
through all of this and it hasn't and isn't going to change. The PG
lists are the odd ones out here, not the other way around, I assure you.
One might compare it to our continued use of CVS. It's wrong and
backwards and all that, but most of the PG community is used to it and
changing is a pain. shrug.
Enjoy,
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 196B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 13:27 Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
3 siblings, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2008-10-17 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; +Cc: \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Bill Moran wrote:
> You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> you.
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.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 13:39 Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
3 siblings, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Collin Kidder @ 2008-10-17 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; +Cc: "Mikkel Høgh" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>> I resent that you're trying to make this a personal thing.
>>
>
> I was going to answer the rest of this email, then I realized that the
> real problem was right here, and discussing anything else was dancing
> around the issue and wasting time.
>
> You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> you.
>
> I'm not saying your problems aren't real, I'm just saying you're apparently
> the only person in this community that has enough trouble with them to
> take the time to start a discussion. To that degree, the problem is
> very personal to you.
>
>
I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him. The
people on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only
way that they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to
disagree. And you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
And, I do agree with him on this issue.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 13:43 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
parent: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sullivan @ 2008-10-17 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 09:27:46AM -0400, Greg Smith 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
They may be well-organized, but they're doing bad things to the mail
headers. RFC 5322 (which just obsoleted 2822) says this:
When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it
indicates the address(es) to which the author of the message suggests
that replies be sent.
The mailing list is not the author of the message. Therefore it
should not alter that header.
Moreover, since you are allowed at most one Reply-To header, if the
original author needs individual responses to go to some other
address, then that Reply-To: header will be lost if the list munges
them.
There is therefore a mail standards reason not to munge the headers,
and it rests in the rules about origin fields and in the potential for
lost functionality. Given the project's goal of SQL conformance, why
would we blow off SMTP standards?
(Anyway, I agree with Tom, so I'm saying nothing more in this thread.)
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@commandprompt.com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:12 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Scott Marlowe @ 2008-10-17 14:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>; +Cc: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com> wrote:
> I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him. The people
> on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only way that
> they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to disagree. And
> you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
>
> And, I do agree with him on this issue.
I prefer the list the way it is. And so do a very large, very silent
majority of users.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:15 Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
parent: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Mikkel Høgh @ 2008-10-17 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On 17/10/2008, at 16.12, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
> wrote:
>> I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him.
>> The people
>> on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only
>> way that
>> they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to
>> disagree. And
>> you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
>>
>> And, I do agree with him on this issue.
>
> I prefer the list the way it is. And so do a very large, very silent
> majority of users.
And no one messes with the silent majority and their spokesmen ;)
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 1.9K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:23 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Scott Marlowe @ 2008-10-17 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org> wrote:
> On 17/10/2008, at 16.12, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him. The
>>> people
>>> on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only way that
>>> they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to disagree.
>>> And
>>> you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
>>>
>>> And, I do agree with him on this issue.
>>
>> I prefer the list the way it is. And so do a very large, very silent
>> majority of users.
>
> And no one messes with the silent majority and their spokesmen ;)
No, no one makes idiotic arguments that go against the RFCs for how to
run a mailing list and then makes the entire pgsql community change
from the rather sensible way it's done to a non-sensical way to
accomodate broken email clients. But I thought that was rather
obvious.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:24 Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
parent: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
1 sibling, 3 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Martin Gainty @ 2008-10-17 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
free unfettered and open discussion without interference from ANY entity is a requirement of a democracy
the REAL question is ..is this a democracy???
Thanks Scott
Martin
Please vote November 4
______________________________________________
Disclaimer and confidentiality note
Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relates to the official business of Sender. This transmission is of a confidential nature and Sender does not endorse distribution to any party other than intended recipient. Sender does not necessarily endorse content contained within this transmission.
> CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> From: mikkel@hoegh.org
> To: scott.marlowe@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Annoying Reply-To
> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:15:20 +0200
>
> On 17/10/2008, at 16.12, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
> > wrote:
> >> I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him.
> >> The people
> >> on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only
> >> way that
> >> they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to
> >> disagree. And
> >> you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
> >>
> >> And, I do agree with him on this issue.
> >
> > I prefer the list the way it is. And so do a very large, very silent
> > majority of users.
>
> And no one messes with the silent majority and their spokesmen ;)
_________________________________________________________________
Want to read Hotmail messages in Outlook? The Wordsmiths show you how.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/wedowindowslive.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!20EE04FBC541789!167.ent...
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:26 Rainer Pruy <Rainer.Pruy@Acrys.COM>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Pruy @ 2008-10-17 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Sigh...
wasting another junk of bandwidth with this bike shed discussion....
Granted, replying here is more annoying and less convenient compared to other lists -
as long as your MUA still does not provide decent support for mailing lists.
Down back from 1998 is RFC 2369 that defined additional headers for mailing lists to indicate important information (e.g. how to post
messages). Thus, since then there is no excuse in hijacking Reply-To headers for use of simplifying mailing list replies.
Even if for the last ten years most MUAs did not care adding support, there is no real reason for blaming mailing list maintainers
that follow current standards for inconveniences caused by dumb MUAs. Especially if there is a reasonable workaround (using Replay All
- not ideal as any workaround but manageable).
Thus, *please* complain with the maintainer of your MUA to get the annoyance alleviated - or change your MUA.
As long as there are "friendly" list maintainers that abuse mail headers for overcoming deficiencies of some MUAs,
there will be no change for the better with MUAs.
Sorry I'm a bit fussy here,
but nowadays there is so much effort wasted with solving the wrong problems in making bad things bearable instead of fixing the
underlying reasons in the first place....
Rainer
Collin Kidder wrote
>
>>> I resent that you're trying to make this a personal thing.
>>>
>>
>> I was going to answer the rest of this email, then I realized that the
>> real problem was right here, and discussing anything else was dancing
>> around the issue and wasting time.
>>
>> You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
>> because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
>> number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
>> you.
>>
>> I'm not saying your problems aren't real, I'm just saying you're
>> apparently
>> the only person in this community that has enough trouble with them to
>> take the time to start a discussion. To that degree, the problem is
>> very personal to you.
>>
>>
>
> I was going to stay out of this but I'll jump in and defend him. The
> people on this list are so pedantic, so sure that their way is the only
> way that they absolutely rain nuclear fire down on anyone who dares to
> disagree. And you wonder why no one sprang to his defense???
>
> And, I do agree with him on this issue.
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:28 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
parent: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-10-17 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>; +Cc: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Martin Gainty escribió:
>
> free unfettered and open discussion without interference from ANY
> entity is a requirement of a democracy the REAL question is ..is this
> a democracy???
_Of course_ it isn't ... (thankfully!)
--
Alvaro Herrera
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:28 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
parent: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Scott Marlowe @ 2008-10-17 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>; +Cc: Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com> wrote:
> free unfettered and open discussion without interference from ANY entity is
> a requirement of a democracy
> the REAL question is ..is this a democracy???
No, it's a well mostly well behaved meritocracy. And I prefer that.
I believe that free and unfettered discussion is important to many
quality forms of governance, not just democracies.
I really do prefer the way this list works because when I hit reply
all to a discussion with "Bob Smith and Postgresql-general" I know
that Bob gets a direct answer from me, now, when he needs it at 2am
when his servers are puking their data out their gigE ports, and the
rest of the list gets it whenever the mailing list server can get
around to it.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 14:41 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-10-17 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>; +Cc: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>; Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Scott Marlowe escribió:
> I really do prefer the way this list works because when I hit reply
> all to a discussion with "Bob Smith and Postgresql-general" I know
> that Bob gets a direct answer from me, now, when he needs it at 2am
> when his servers are puking their data out their gigE ports, and the
> rest of the list gets it whenever the mailing list server can get
> around to it.
Right. It also works in the following situations:
1. Bob Smith posted without being subscribed; when the moderator
approves and somebody replies to Bob, whenever Bob responds the person
that he is responding to will receive his response right away without
having to wait for the moderator.
1a. Note that this means that crossposting to lists from other projects
works too (for example when there are discussions between here and
FreeBSD)
2. In the example (1) above, Bob is sure to receive the response,
whereas if the list was the Reply-To-set kind, Bob would never get it;
he'd have to troll the archives
3. Discussions continue to work even when the list servers die (happens,
even if rare) or they are very slow (relatively frequent)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 15:19 Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@webthatworks.it>
parent: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo @ 2008-10-17 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:56:34 -0400
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> * Bill Moran (wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) wrote:
> > You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's
> > personal because you are the only one complaining about it.
> > Despite the large number of people on this list, I don't see
> > anyone jumping in to defend you.
>
> Ugh. No one else is jumping in simply because we've already been
> through all of this and it hasn't and isn't going to change. The
> PG lists are the odd ones out here, not the other way around, I
> assure you. One might compare it to our continued use of CVS.
> It's wrong and backwards and all that, but most of the PG
> community is used to it and changing is a pain. shrug.
I'd say because postgresql list has been used to it by a longer time
than most of the new comers doing the other way around did. But it
seems that the new comers are the most vocal.
Maybe because what's in the email headers have been abstracted to
them long ago they never had the need to look what they are for and
use them properly getting all the functionality their way has and
some additional bits too.
It is surprising how many people think to have enough knowledge in
email distribution systems to discuss an RFC that has been
already rewritten 1 time.
It would be nice if all those people spent their time rewriting in a
coherent way that RFC so that Reply-To works as they think is best
for the overall Internet without breaking any already existent
functionality before challenging this list consolidated habits.
Settings of ml are generally a mirror of their community.
Decent email clients have a switch for reckless people. That's
freedom.
Mine is called: "Reply button invokes mailing list reply".
Decent lists generally have quite helpful headers for filtering and
choosing to reply to the right address.
If you're for freedom... then let the recipients choose. Not the
list. If people insist in badly configuring/choosing their email
clients how far are you willing to go to protect them against
themselves and imposing a toll on the rest of the others?
I think the overall amount of the time I spent choosing the right
button in my life is lower than the time a single person has spent
writing 1 post on this topic and much much much lower than the time
they will have to spend in excuses (if anything worse) the first
time they will send to the wrong address.
But still it is much more than the time the people are complaining
have spent reading RFC 2822 and considering its implications.
But maybe this will give everyone a chance to consider all the small
coherent technical details that good engineers placed deciding about
email headers and email clients and reconsider what RFC are there
for.
If headers are properly set the action taken once you press your
chosen button is unambiguous and you conserve as much information as
possible.
If you think the majority is right since most of the people that
arrived to the Internet late got used to mangled Reply-To I think
that mistakes are educating. But till people will ignore what's
available and why I bet they will just learn to wait 20 minutes
before sending any email after their first expensive error, rather
than considering other ways to operate.
BTW consider this even from a HCI point of view... you still need 2
functions: one to send to "list" one to "author".
Saying you just want one button since 99% of times you'll reply to
the list is making the wrong expensive choice even more probable.
Once you've "2 buttons" why should you mangle the headers and give
them meaning they don't have?
Because most of the people aren't able to properly chose and
configure their email client?
What's wrong between making the difference in the header, in the
client and in your mind between Reply-to and List-Post?
Or is it better that the client thinks that Reply-To is replying to
the Sender (that's not true), the mailing list thinks that the
Reply-To is the List-Post (that's not true) and you think that today
is a good day to play lottery (In Italy it may be true)?
If you're among the reckless people you could get used to invoke the
"send to list" button and let your client send it to the Reply-To in
case there is no List-Post... or whatever bad habit you enjoy more.
But I see no reason to harass an RFC.
What about non standard web sites that have to cope with not
standard browsers and then being forced to adapt browsers that were
already standard to cope with non standard web sites?
Does it sound familiar?
I beg everyone pardon, especially to Tom Lane whose replies always
shine here, but I couldn't resist to reply to people thinking I'm not
"sensible", I took it personally ;) Evidently I'm old enough to
know the existence of RFCs but not mature enough ;)
--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 15:29 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
parent: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@webthatworks.it>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Frost @ 2008-10-17 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@webthatworks.it>; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
* Ivan Sergio Borgonovo (mail@webthatworks.it) wrote:
> I'd say because postgresql list has been used to it by a longer time
> than most of the new comers doing the other way around did. But it
> seems that the new comers are the most vocal.
sigh. First people complain that poor Mikkel is the only one
complaining, now people are bitching that us 'new comers' are the most
vocal when we point out he's not alone. Yes, the PG lists have been
around a long time. So have the Debian lists. In the end, it's not a
contest. This discussion obviously isn't going anywhere tho, and it's
not going to change the list policy, so let's just drop it, please. I'm
sure we'll all have an opportunity to revisit it (again) in another 6
months.
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 196B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 18:15 Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
parent: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2008-10-17 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> There is therefore a mail standards reason not to munge the headers, and
> it rests in the rules about origin fields and in the potential for lost
> functionality.
I should have included the standard links to both sides of this
discussion:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml
I find the "Principle of Minimal Bandwidth" and "Principle of Least Total
Work" arguments in the latter match my personal preferences here better
(particularly as someone who only cares about on-list replies even more
than the 90% of the time given in that example), while respecting that
true RFC-compliance is also a reasonable perspective.
It's also clear to me you'll never change the mind of anyone who had
adopted a firm stance on either side here. My spirit for e-mail pedantry
arguments was broken recently anyway, when I had someone I'm compelled to
communicate with regularly complain that they couldn't follow my
top-posted messages and requested me to reply "like everybody else" to
their mail in the future.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 19:01 Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
parent: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
3 siblings, 3 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Guy Rouillier @ 2008-10-17 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Bill Moran wrote:
> You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> you.
I'm another in the crowd that had this same discussion when I joined
years ago. I had the same point of view as Mikkel, but I've adapted to
the community way of doing things.
When I use "Reply All" in Thunderbird, it adds a "To:" to each of the
individuals in the discussion, and a "CC:" to the list. Since I
personally don't like receiving multiple copies of emails from this
list, I delete all of the "To:" addressees and change the list from
"CC:" to "To:". Would be nice if everyone did the same.
--
Guy Rouillier
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 19:15 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-10-17 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Guy Rouillier wrote:
> When I use "Reply All" in Thunderbird, it adds a "To:" to each of the
> individuals in the discussion, and a "CC:" to the list. Since I
> personally don't like receiving multiple copies of emails from this
> list, I delete all of the "To:" addressees and change the list from
> "CC:" to "To:". Would be nice if everyone did the same.
I don't know about Thunderbird, but my email client has a keystroke that
does exactly that. I disable that feature though, because I don't like
it; I very much prefer the two copies because I get the fastest one
first (of course, I only receive one -- the system makes sure that the
second one is not delivered to me but discarded silently).
I would be really annoyed if my mail system inflicted so much pain on my
as Thunderbird seems to inflict on you.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 19:26 Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>
parent: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Serge Fonville @ 2008-10-17 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>wrote:
> Altough I am not sure what the real issue is,I do know that on (for
> example) the tomcat mailing list, when I choose reply (in gmail) the to:
> field contains the address of the mailing list.
> Based on what I know, this should be relatively easy to set up in the
> mailing list manager.
>
> just my 2ct
>
> Serge Fonvilee
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 9:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera <
> alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
>> Guy Rouillier wrote:
>>
>> > When I use "Reply All" in Thunderbird, it adds a "To:" to each of the
>> > individuals in the discussion, and a "CC:" to the list. Since I
>> > personally don't like receiving multiple copies of emails from this
>> > list, I delete all of the "To:" addressees and change the list from
>> > "CC:" to "To:". Would be nice if everyone did the same.
>>
>> I don't know about Thunderbird, but my email client has a keystroke that
>> does exactly that. I disable that feature though, because I don't like
>> it; I very much prefer the two copies because I get the fastest one
>> first (of course, I only receive one -- the system makes sure that the
>> second one is not delivered to me but discarded silently).
>>
>> I would be really annoyed if my mail system inflicted so much pain on my
>> as Thunderbird seems to inflict on you.
>>
>> --
>> Alvaro Herrera
>> http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
>> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 19:43 Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@pepper.home.highrise.ca>
parent: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Aidan Van Dyk @ 2008-10-17 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
* Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com> [081001 00:00]:
> Bill Moran wrote:
> >You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> >because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> >number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> >you.
>
> I'm another in the crowd that had this same discussion when I joined
> years ago. I had the same point of view as Mikkel, but I've adapted to
> the community way of doing things.
>
> When I use "Reply All" in Thunderbird, it adds a "To:" to each of the
> individuals in the discussion, and a "CC:" to the list. Since I
> personally don't like receiving multiple copies of emails from this
> list, I delete all of the "To:" addressees and change the list from
> "CC:" to "To:". Would be nice if everyone did the same.
Since you asked, I did.
But now, if the list munged my reply-to, how would you get back to me?
"Clicking on the author", as the 2nd link Greg posted suggested *won't*
work. In fact, my MUA explicitly told you how to get back to me (by
setting a reply-to), but if the MLM munged that...
/me is glad that PostgreSQL doesn't "just insert NULL" when I give it an
empty string, just because "NULL is pretty much the same thing" ;-)
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 20:02 Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
parent: Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Dave Coventry @ 2008-10-17 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ; +Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
I am a member of a number of lists, some of which exhibit this
'reply-to' behaviour and I have also managed to adapt... to a point.
Sometimes, however, I do end up replying directly to the poster rather
than through the list. Tellingly, I very nearly sent this post
directly to Serge Fonvilee.
Without wanting to be too controversial, I have generally found that
the lists which have the default reply configured like this do tend to
be those that are dominated by members who are, shall we say, pedantic
about protocol and 'netiquette'.
Personally I would prefer the default reply-to to go to the list, but
I'm not really bothered about it.
My 2 cents.
Disclaimer: If we are not talking about the default 'reply-to'
behaviour of this list, please ignore this post; I came upon the
thread late and it is possible that I am at cross purposes.
Kind reagards,
Dave Coventry
2008/10/17 Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>:
> Altough I am not sure what the real issue is,
> I do know that on (for example) the tomcat mailing list, when I choose
> reply (in gmail) the to: field contains the address of the mailing list.
> Based on what I know, this should be relatively easy to set up in the
> mailing list manager.
> just my 2ct
> Serge Fonvilee
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-17 20:17 Jason Long <mailing.list@supernovasoftware.com>
parent: Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Jason Long @ 2008-10-17 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
I am not fond of this approach either. I never find myself replying
directly to the poster.
I actually greatly prefer forums which email me a copy of every post
with a nice link to the original thread. 95% of the time I do not even
need to use the link. The latest posting is enough.
This makes things more organized as accessible.
Dave Coventry wrote:
> I am a member of a number of lists, some of which exhibit this
> 'reply-to' behaviour and I have also managed to adapt... to a point.
>
> Sometimes, however, I do end up replying directly to the poster rather
> than through the list. Tellingly, I very nearly sent this post
> directly to Serge Fonvilee.
>
> Without wanting to be too controversial, I have generally found that
> the lists which have the default reply configured like this do tend to
> be those that are dominated by members who are, shall we say, pedantic
> about protocol and 'netiquette'.
>
> Personally I would prefer the default reply-to to go to the list, but
> I'm not really bothered about it.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> Disclaimer: If we are not talking about the default 'reply-to'
> behaviour of this list, please ignore this post; I came upon the
> thread late and it is possible that I am at cross purposes.
>
> Kind reagards,
>
> Dave Coventry
>
>
> 2008/10/17 Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>:
>
>> Altough I am not sure what the real issue is,
>> I do know that on (for example) the tomcat mailing list, when I choose
>> reply (in gmail) the to: field contains the address of the mailing list.
>> Based on what I know, this should be relatively easy to set up in the
>> mailing list manager.
>> just my 2ct
>> Serge Fonvilee
>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-18 01:47 Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
parent: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Michelle Konzack @ 2008-10-18 01:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Am 2008-10-17 08:12:00, schrieb Scott Marlowe:
> I prefer the list the way it is. And so do a very large, very silent
> majority of users.
<pip> I agree with you.
I am on Mailinglist since I use the Internet (1995) and there are not
very much mailinglists which manipulate the "Reply-To:" Header...
So, I prefer, HOW this list is.
Of course, I reply with <l> or <Reply-To-List>.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
+49/177/9351947 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Attachments:
signature.pgp (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-18 01:50 Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
parent: Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Michelle Konzack @ 2008-10-18 01:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Hi Martinn, here the great Dictator Michelle!
Am 2008-10-17 10:24:44, schrieb Martin Gainty:
>
> free unfettered and open discussion without interference from ANY entity is a requirement of a democracy
> the REAL question is ..is this a democracy???
Shut-Up or I will install you Micr0$of SQL Server... LOL ;-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
+49/177/9351947 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Attachments:
signature.pgp (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-18 01:55 Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
parent: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Michelle Konzack @ 2008-10-18 01:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; +Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
Am 2008-10-17 08:42:46, schrieb Andrew Sullivan:
> My suggestion would be to use a mail user agent that knows how to read
> the list headers, which were standardized many years ago. Then you
> "reply to list". Mutt has done this for at least a few years now. I
> don't know about other MUAs.
N.C. ;-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
+49/177/9351947 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Attachments:
signature.pgp (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-20 14:56 Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
parent: Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Martin Gainty @ 2008-10-20 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
since you are not an advocate of democracy I bid you adieu
Martin
______________________________________________
Disclaimer and confidentiality note
Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relates to the official business of Sender. This transmission is of a confidential nature and Sender does not endorse distribution to any party other than intended recipient. Sender does not necessarily endorse content contained within this transmission.
> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 03:50:07 +0200
> From: linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Annoying Reply-To
>
> Hi Martinn, here the great Dictator Michelle!
>
> Am 2008-10-17 10:24:44, schrieb Martin Gainty:
> >
> > free unfettered and open discussion without interference from ANY entity is a requirement of a democracy
> > the REAL question is ..is this a democracy???
>
> Shut-Up or I will install you Micr0$of SQL Server... LOL ;-)
>
> Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
> Michelle Konzack
> Systemadministrator
> 24V Electronic Engineer
> Tamay Dogan Network
> Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
>
>
> --
> Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
> ##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
> Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
> +49/177/9351947 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
> +33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
_________________________________________________________________
Want to read Hotmail messages in Outlook? The Wordsmiths show you how.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/wedowindowslive.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!20EE04FBC541789!167.ent...
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-21 15:39 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
parent: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2008-10-21 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; +Cc: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
On Friday 17 October 2008 22:01:33 Guy Rouillier wrote:
> When I use "Reply All" in Thunderbird, it adds a "To:" to each of the
> individuals in the discussion, and a "CC:" to the list. Since I
> personally don't like receiving multiple copies of emails from this
> list, I delete all of the "To:" addressees and change the list from
> "CC:" to "To:". Would be nice if everyone did the same.
Set the eliminatecc option in your majordomo configuration to avoid getting
duplicate mail.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-21 23:32 Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
parent: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@pepper.home.highrise.ca>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Guy Rouillier @ 2008-10-21 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> But now, if the list munged my reply-to, how would you get back to me?
I wouldn't ;). The whole point of a mailing list is to have discussions
with the list. If I wanted to correspond with you directly, I wouldn't
use the list for that.
--
Guy Rouillier
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-22 03:47 Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
parent: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@pepper.home.highrise.ca>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2008-10-22 03:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aidan@highrise.ca; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> But now, if the list munged my reply-to, how would you get back to me?
Why'd you have to interrupt a perfectly good, unwinnable idealogical
argument with a technical question? While there is only one reply-to
allowed for a message, you can put multiple addresses in there. It is not
necessarily the case that a list that munges the header must be lossy
(although majordomo isn't a good example here[1]). As most incoming list
messages around only have a from, not a reply-to, you can usefully add
reply-to for regular messages to redirect them to the list (the goal
people who are pro list-based reply to want) and append the list address
to any existing reply-to for the occasional odd message that specifies it
directly, like yours I'm replying to.
As for an actual implementation of good behavior here, see the end of
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-admin/node11.html for one
example of list software that supports adding a reply-to without stripping
any already there off in the process.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 17:01 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
parent: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2008-10-23 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>; +Cc: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; \"Mikkel Høgh\" <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Greg Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> > because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> > number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> > you.
>
> 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.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 17:15 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-10-23 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; +Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>; Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>; Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 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.
That's not really the case. I always use "reply to all" in mutt (the
"g" key) and it always work; in all the lists I subscribe (including
those which set reply-to) and in personal email too.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 17:25 Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
parent: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
1 sibling, 3 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Collin Kidder @ 2008-10-23 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
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.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 17:42 ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: ries van Twisk @ 2008-10-23 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:25 PM, Collin Kidder wrote:
> 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 have the same experience, only PG list seems to behave different.
In my humble opinion I feel that I am subscribed to the list (It also
says on the bottom Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org
)), so a reply (not reply all --- remove original author) should go
back to the list where I am subscribed at, in in my opinion the source
is the list aswell (that's why I am getting it in the first place).
>
>
> 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.
mail.App is crippled aswell.. I think I will install Mutt again for
convenience --- just kidding...
Ries
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 18:09 Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2 siblings, 3 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Angel Alvarez @ 2008-10-23 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
El Jueves 23 Octubre 2008 Collin Kidder escribió:
> >> 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.
What's such most advanced mail reader??
No one, ive seen, seems to be perfect nor thunderbird.
By the way kmail has 4 options (reply, reply to all, reply to author, reply to list)
in addition to be able to use list headers included in the message.
in fact many other mail-list dont have such extended features, as not all of the
previous 4 options works as expected. For me this makes postgres lists the most
complete about the RFC.
So is about, thunderbird to move forward one step, not to cripple standars back.
In fact this remembers me the M$ way of doing things..
Regards, Angel
--
------------------------------------------------
Clist UAH
------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 18:12 Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alan Hodgson @ 2008-10-23 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Thursday 23 October 2008, Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com> wrote:
> 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.
If it bugs you that much, just fix it for yourself.
:0 fr
* ^(To:|Cc:).*pgsql-general@postgresql.org.*
| /usr/bin/formail -I "Reply-To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org"
.. and eliminate any dupes:
:0 Whc: /home/$USER/.msgid.lock
|/usr/bin/formail -D 1024 /home/$USER/.msgid.cache
If your MUA doesn't work right, procmail is your friend.
--
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 18:31 Raymond O'Donnell <rod@iol.ie>
parent: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Raymond O'Donnell @ 2008-10-23 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: clist@uah.es; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On 23/10/2008 19:09, Angel Alvarez wrote:
> No one, ive seen, seems to be perfect nor thunderbird.
> By the way kmail has 4 options (reply, reply to all, reply to author, reply to list)
> in addition to be able to use list headers included in the message.
Here's a "reply to list" add-on for ThunderBird - it's marked
experimental, but may be worth a try:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon/4455
Ray.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland
rod@iol.ie
Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals
------------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 18:31 Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
parent: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Collin Kidder @ 2008-10-23 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Angel Alvarez wrote:
> What's such most advanced mail reader??
>
> No one, ive seen, seems to be perfect nor thunderbird.
> By the way kmail has 4 options (reply, reply to all, reply to author, reply to list)
> in addition to be able to use list headers included in the message.
>
> in fact many other mail-list dont have such extended features, as not all of the
> previous 4 options works as expected. For me this makes postgres lists the most
> complete about the RFC.
>
> So is about, thunderbird to move forward one step, not to cripple standars back.
> In fact this remembers me the M$ way of doing things..
>
> Regards, Angel
>
>
>
One could argue that a standard which is respected by nobody but a few
people from this list is NOT a standard but rather a botched attempt at
creating a standard which no one wanted.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 18:46 Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Angel Alvarez @ 2008-10-23 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Well
but the RFC's were in fact prior to thunderbird
So for he most of its life, when few people was using it,
Thiunderbird was a sad example of your botched attempt of creating a
standar of NOT FOLLOWING THE RFC's...
Well, also M$ thought they invented internet so its a common mistake.
May be you can push Thunderbird guys a bit to include a little more funcionailty
other than complaining others that try to follow what to seemed to be the right way.
Are we going to try be standars compliant or we keep trying to reinvent the wheel?
Poor RFC people, what a waste of time...
Regards, Angel
El Jueves 23 Octubre 2008 Collin Kidder escribió:
> Angel Alvarez wrote:
> > What's such most advanced mail reader??
> >
> > No one, ive seen, seems to be perfect nor thunderbird.
> > By the way kmail has 4 options (reply, reply to all, reply to author, reply to list)
> > in addition to be able to use list headers included in the message.
> >
> > in fact many other mail-list dont have such extended features, as not all of the
> > previous 4 options works as expected. For me this makes postgres lists the most
> > complete about the RFC.
> >
> > So is about, thunderbird to move forward one step, not to cripple standars back.
> > In fact this remembers me the M$ way of doing things..
> >
> > Regards, Angel
> >
> >
> >
>
> One could argue that a standard which is respected by nobody but a few
> people from this list is NOT a standard but rather a botched attempt at
> creating a standard which no one wanted.
>
--
Ningún personajillo ha sido vilipendiado si no es necesario. El 'buen rollo' está en nuestras manos.
->>-----------------------------------------------
Clist UAH a.k.a Angel
---------------------------------[www.uah.es]-<<--
"BIG BANG: átomo primigenio que, debido a una incorrecta manipulación por parte de Dios, explotó y provocó una tremenda algarada en el vacío, razón por la que, aún hoy, las empresas aseguradoras no quieren ni oír hablar de Dios."
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 19:01 Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
parent: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Collin Kidder @ 2008-10-23 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Angel Alvarez wrote:
> Well
>
> but the RFC's were in fact prior to thunderbird
> So for he most of its life, when few people was using it,
> Thiunderbird was a sad example of your botched attempt of creating a
> standar of NOT FOLLOWING THE RFC's...
>
But, as I mentioned, nobody cares about this particular standard. In my
opinion a standard which is totally ignored by almost everyone is
effectively dead and worthless.
> Well, also M$ thought they invented internet so its a common mistake.
>
I thought that was Al Gore that invented the internet. ;-)
> May be you can push Thunderbird guys a bit to include a little more funcionailty
> other than complaining others that try to follow what to seemed to be the right way.
>
> Are we going to try be standars compliant or we keep trying to reinvent the wheel?
>
> Poor RFC people, what a waste of time...
>
Standards are all well and good but anything should be evaluated for
it's utility. If a standard is undesirable then it's undesirable. Most
mailing lists do not exhibit the same behavior as this list not because
they are all ignorant of the standard but because they feel that
following the standard is not desirable. I'm perfectly fine to follow
the convention of this list. Some lists like top posting. Not this one.
That's ok, I'll bottom or interleaved post. All I'm saying is that one
cannot look to standards as gospel and disengage their brains. It's
perfectly acceptable to say 'this standard sucks!' And so, I along with
a couple of other people from this list, say 'this standard sucks.'
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 19:07 Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
parent: Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Steve Atkins @ 2008-10-23 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general General <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Collin Kidder wrote:
> Angel Alvarez wrote:
>> Well
>>
>> but the RFC's were in fact prior to thunderbird
>> So for he most of its life, when few people was using it,
>> Thiunderbird was a sad example of your botched attempt of creating a
>> standar of NOT FOLLOWING THE RFC's...
>>
> But, as I mentioned, nobody cares about this particular standard. In
> my opinion a standard which is totally ignored by almost everyone is
> effectively dead and worthless.
If you don't like it (and this applies to everyone else arguing about
it, on either side) please do one of these three things:
1. "Fix" it locally at your end, as is trivial to do with procmail,
amongst other approaches, and quit whining about it.
or
2. Quit whining about it.
or
3. Find somewhere else to whine about it and quit whining about it here.
Cheers,
Steve
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 20:44 Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
parent: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2008-10-23 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Angel Alvarez wrote:
>>>> horse. Since I use the most advanced e-mail client on the market I just
>>>> work around that the settings here are weird
>
> What's such most advanced mail reader??
That quoted bit was actually from me, I was hoping to get a laugh out of
anyone who actually looked at the header of my messages to see what I use.
Or perhaps start a flamewar with those deviant mutt users; that would be
about as productive as the continued existence of this thread.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 20:51 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-10-23 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>; +Cc: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Greg Smith escribió:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Angel Alvarez wrote:
>
>>>>> horse. Since I use the most advanced e-mail client on the market I just
>>>>> work around that the settings here are weird
>>
>> What's such most advanced mail reader??
>
> That quoted bit was actually from me, I was hoping to get a laugh out of
> anyone who actually looked at the header of my messages to see what I
> use.
You did get a laugh from me, one of those deviant mutt users ;-)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 20:52 ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
parent: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: ries van Twisk @ 2008-10-23 20:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>; +Cc: Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Oct 23, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Angel Alvarez wrote:
>
>>>>> horse. Since I use the most advanced e-mail client on the
>>>>> market I just
>>>>> work around that the settings here are weird
>>
>> What's such most advanced mail reader??
>
> That quoted bit was actually from me, I was hoping to get a laugh
> out of anyone who actually looked at the header of my messages to
> see what I use. Or perhaps start a flamewar with those deviant mutt
> users; that would be about as productive as the continued existence
> of this thread.
Just checked... it says : Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
Does that mean a reply should go back to the sender???? :D Just
kidding....
anyways.. I don't care anymore... I will do a reply all.
regards, Ries van Twisk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 20:54 Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
parent: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 57+ messages in thread
From: Dave Coventry @ 2008-10-23 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>; +Cc: pgsql-general General <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
2008/10/23 Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>:
> If you don't like it (and this applies to everyone else arguing about it, on
> either side) please do one of these three things:
>
> 1. "Fix" it locally at your end, as is trivial to do with procmail, amongst
> other approaches, and quit whining about it.
>
> or
>
> 2. Quit whining about it.
>
> or
>
> 3. Find somewhere else to whine about it and quit whining about it here.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's personal
> > because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite the large
> > number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in to defend
> > you.
Personally I am of the view that, as I am on this list principally to
get support from it, and I am quite prepared to submit to the vagaries
and oddities of the list behaviour in pursuit of the answers I might
seek.
As such, I am quite prepared to 1) Fix it my end, 2) Quit whining
about it and 3) Find something else to whine about.
However, the point is made by Bill that 'only one person' might feel
that the reply-to configuration could be improved, and I feel
compelled to say that, while I might not be driven to complain about
the list behaviour myself, I do feel that the OP does have a point.
And that's all that I'm going to say on the matter.
- Dave Coventry
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 22:02 Aarni <aarni@kymi.com>
parent: Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Aarni @ 2008-10-23 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Hulou hjuvat folkenbergers und goody good peoples ute po daer in allas e
oceanos / terranos,
I chose to 'Reply to Mailing-List' in my preferred mail app. (Kmail on Ubuntu
8.10) I really don't know why ... but shore hope, mean sure, as in truly, this
is hopefully not an annoying postage broadcastung. wink, lol, capatcha,
tsajajaja, manolito!
Furthermore, I am pop to(a)sting. Phonetically reversed, top posting.
Puff the embers every once and a while. To have [a] flame[s] --help?.
Keep on keepin' on.
SamiTjahkasTjohkasny, äeeäee kenen poro, Vincentin Genen? Simmons? Gruppa?
Gene? Ootsiäee ihan varma? Oks sähöstarttii, ahe! Läks, where's mi head
(laughing it off)?
Focus. "Remember, there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending
over."
-- great late FZ --
Wha'ever dad means, I think we need some standards.
1. I wish
2. I had a button that kept me from sending silly messages.
3. Whoops, still not do.
Rock,
Aarni
Received: from mx2.hub.org ([200.46.204.254]:26819 "EHLO mx2.hub.org")
by northstar.iwn.fi with ESMTP id S10843AbYJWU4D (ORCPT
<rfc822;aarni@kymi.com>); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:56:03 +0300
Received: from postgresql.org (unknown [200.46.204.86])
by mx2.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DEDA1E8229B;
Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:55:49 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B161764FD71
for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:54:47
-0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 73727-01-4 for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:54:44 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com
[209.85.198.231])
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301A164FD93
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:54:42 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so482917rvf.43
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:54:41 -0700
(PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to
:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
bh=7Asrle/2g7OnvL+HaGS+X0l8PHMMoueNpeFTF88Jfzs=;
b=cyRbNr15f00Tbu7laTnSM9nSmJhkwnqBa04eGgWN7AV9nfxSEqrCM0EhMiy0ZFPec1
PzBioeul06+v2CNCD7LDc3KiTHky2DliiA7gYedUtJcW6UJtjbeqo1CxBqEA/sM47FHO
fHmhUNIJ9nh5tnfI4SejEiDdht1mgmGsdbFDM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
:references;
b=UIdt6g6DfV7h1z9tYcTxlUF90IFoeN6iAAH6GHrzWsp5VpluWUEIVgsZloJkDcIFeh
ffuxRD9Ucq2bPWcnk2flEeLbyCQwOvDsiU5WR24JGYF5LAPugouNEKW5xeLAOnN5JA8/
V7/aUnJMkdkdCNxpLyGBxCUsJcbVKgGDdyaN0=
Received: by 10.141.162.16 with SMTP id p16mr661554rvo.243.1224795281837;
Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:54:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.77.14 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:54:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4cba5adc0810231354u68a72c8fw42a03d4603a95b29@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:54:41 +0200
From: "Dave Coventry" <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
To: "Steve Atkins" <steve@blighty.com>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Annoying Reply-To
Cc: "pgsql-general General" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <3A121E4F-3C3A-4CC0-86B6-3AF4D78D7BA4@blighty.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200810231701.m9NH1ML21995@momjian.us>
<200810232009.04806.clist@uah.es> <4900C30A.8030604@kkmfg.com>
<200810232046.54731.clist@uah.es> <4900CA27.6060800@kkmfg.com>
<3A121E4F-3C3A-4CC0-86B6-3AF4D78D7BA4@blighty.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level:
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-general
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general;
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-general>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-general>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Return-Path: <pgsql-general-owner+M139303@postgresql.org>
X-Envelope-To: <kymimail@iwn.fi> (uid 0)
X-Orcpt: rfc822;aarni@kymi.com
Original-Recipient: rfc822;aarni@kymi.com
Status: R
X-Status: N
X-KMail-EncryptionState:
X-KMail-SignatureState:
X-KMail-MDN-Sent:
On Thursday 23 October 2008 23:54:41 Dave Coventry wrote:
> 2008/10/23 Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>:
> > If you don't like it (and this applies to everyone else arguing about it,
> > on either side) please do one of these three things:
> >
> > 1. "Fix" it locally at your end, as is trivial to do with procmail,
> > amongst other approaches, and quit whining about it.
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2. Quit whining about it.
> >
> > or
> >
> > 3. Find somewhere else to whine about it and quit whining about it here.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steve
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Bill Moran wrote:
> > > You can resent it or not, but this _is_ a personal thing. It's
> > > personal because you are the only one complaining about it. Despite
> > > the large number of people on this list, I don't see anyone jumping in
> > > to defend you.
>
> Personally I am of the view that, as I am on this list principally to
> get support from it, and I am quite prepared to submit to the vagaries
> and oddities of the list behaviour in pursuit of the answers I might
> seek.
>
> As such, I am quite prepared to 1) Fix it my end, 2) Quit whining
> about it and 3) Find something else to whine about.
>
> However, the point is made by Bill that 'only one person' might feel
> that the reply-to configuration could be improved, and I feel
> compelled to say that, while I might not be driven to complain about
> the list behaviour myself, I do feel that the OP does have a point.
>
> And that's all that I'm going to say on the matter.
>
> - Dave Coventry
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 22:37 Rob Wultsch <wultsch@gmail.com>
parent: ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Rob Wultsch @ 2008-10-23 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>; +Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:42 AM, ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl> wrote:
>
> On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:25 PM, Collin Kidder wrote:
>
> 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 have the same experience, only PG list seems to behave different.
>
> In my humble opinion I feel that I am subscribed to the list (It also says
> on the bottom Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (
> pgsql-general@postgresql.org)), so a reply (not reply all --- remove
> original author) should go back to the list where I am subscribed at, in in
> my opinion the source is the list aswell (that's why I am getting it in the
> first place).
>
I know of at least one other list that is similar: MySQL.
And I brought it up a year ago with no eventual change:
http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/209593
After a while you just get used to hitting reply all when you mean to reply
all. I now prefer (though not strongly) this setting.
--
Rob Wultsch
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-23 23:18 Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
parent: Raymond O'Donnell <rod@iol.ie>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Guy Rouillier @ 2008-10-23 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
> On 23/10/2008 19:09, Angel Alvarez wrote:
>
>> No one, ive seen, seems to be perfect nor thunderbird.
>> By the way kmail has 4 options (reply, reply to all, reply to author, reply to list)
>> in addition to be able to use list headers included in the message.
>
> Here's a "reply to list" add-on for ThunderBird - it's marked
> experimental, but may be worth a try:
>
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon/4455
Works great! Thanks, Ray - no more complaints from me ;). Anyone using
Thunderbird to read this list would benefit from this add-on.
--
Guy Rouillier
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
* Re: Annoying Reply-To
@ 2008-10-24 15:11 Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
parent: ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 57+ messages in thread
From: Michelle Konzack @ 2008-10-24 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Am 2008-10-23 15:52:30, schrieb ries van Twisk:
> anyways.. I don't care anymore... I will do a reply all.
I do normaly: killall ;-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
+49/177/9351947 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Attachments:
signature.pgp (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 57+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-10-24 15:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-10-17 11:02 Annoying Reply-To Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2008-10-17 11:20 ` Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
2008-10-17 11:48 ` Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2008-10-17 12:01 ` Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
2008-10-17 12:10 ` Michael Glaesemann <grzm@seespotcode.net>
2008-10-17 12:25 ` Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2008-10-17 12:49 ` Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
2008-10-17 12:56 ` Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
2008-10-17 15:19 ` Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@webthatworks.it>
2008-10-17 15:29 ` Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
2008-10-17 13:27 ` Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
2008-10-17 13:43 ` Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-17 18:15 ` Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
2008-10-23 17:01 ` Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
2008-10-23 17:15 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-23 17:25 ` Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2008-10-23 17:42 ` ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
2008-10-23 22:37 ` Rob Wultsch <wultsch@gmail.com>
2008-10-23 18:09 ` Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
2008-10-23 18:31 ` Raymond O'Donnell <rod@iol.ie>
2008-10-23 23:18 ` Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2008-10-23 18:31 ` Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2008-10-23 18:46 ` Angel Alvarez <clist@uah.es>
2008-10-23 19:01 ` Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2008-10-23 19:07 ` Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
2008-10-23 20:54 ` Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
2008-10-23 22:02 ` Aarni <aarni@kymi.com>
2008-10-23 20:44 ` Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
2008-10-23 20:51 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-23 20:52 ` ries van Twisk <pg@rvt.dds.nl>
2008-10-24 15:11 ` Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
2008-10-23 18:12 ` Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@simkin.ca>
2008-10-17 13:39 ` Collin Kidder <adderd@kkmfg.com>
2008-10-17 14:12 ` Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
2008-10-17 14:15 ` Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2008-10-17 14:23 ` Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
2008-10-17 14:24 ` Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
2008-10-17 14:28 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
2008-10-17 14:28 ` Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
2008-10-17 14:41 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-18 01:50 ` Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
2008-10-20 14:56 ` Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com>
2008-10-18 01:47 ` Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
2008-10-17 14:26 ` Rainer Pruy <Rainer.Pruy@Acrys.COM>
2008-10-17 19:01 ` Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2008-10-17 19:15 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-17 19:26 ` Serge Fonville <serge.fonville@gmail.com>
2008-10-17 20:02 ` Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com>
2008-10-17 20:17 ` Jason Long <mailing.list@supernovasoftware.com>
2008-10-17 19:43 ` Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@pepper.home.highrise.ca>
2008-10-21 23:32 ` Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2008-10-22 03:47 ` Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
2008-10-21 15:39 ` Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
2008-10-17 12:06 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2008-10-17 12:33 ` Mikkel Høgh <mikkel@hoegh.org>
2008-10-17 12:42 ` Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
2008-10-18 01:55 ` Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox