From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: reply to setting
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:13:21 -0500
Message-ID: <20040811191321.GA14350@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0408070933080K.01190@thenilgiris.com>
References: <0408070933080K.01190@thenilgiris.com>
On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 09:33:08 +0530,
Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com> wrote:
> hi,
> any reason why the default reply-to on this list should not be set to the
> list? I keep replying to postings only to find later that the reply goes to
> the OP and not to the list. reply-all button results in needless duplication
The duplication is needless. Direct replies very often get to the recipient
faster than ones sent through the lists. It is also possible that the direct
replies might be handled differently by the recipient (e.g. a filter may put
them in different folders).
Recipients that prefer not to get separate copies can indicate that desire
by including an appropiate mail-followup-to header.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, lawgon@thenilgiris.com
Subject: Re: reply to setting
In-Reply-To: <20040811191321.GA14350@wolff.to>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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