geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Blewitt <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] change Reply-To to go to geronimo-dev
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2003 10:21:31 GMT
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 10:18:47AM +0100, Andrew Savory wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> Not a committer, but -1 for the following reasons:
> -1 me too!
> I am using Mutt, which ahs no problems with mailing lists
> and i have now the problems which you described below ..

I think that was two -1's with many +1's in the list ...

>> # It violates the principle of minimal munging.

Sorry, don't know what that is.

>> # It provides no benefit to the user of a reasonable mailer.\

Talking on a list (by default) is talking to the entire group. The 
Reply button uses the Reply-To, so the default option is the correct 

By contrast, sending a mail to an individual is still very easy; use 
'Reply All' (or whatever) and delete the mailing list address.

>> # It limits a subscriber's freedom to choose how he or she will 
>> direct a
>> response.

It's still possible to send it only to the originator, using the 
technique described above or cut'n'paste for the address. Failing that, 
typing the address manually is also a possibility, so it doesn't limit 
freedom. It just changes the default.

>> # It actually reduces functionality for the user of a reasonable 
>> mailer.

Reasonable mailers have cut'n'paste and Reply All as described above.

>> # It removes important information, which can make it impossible to 
>> get
>> back to the message sender.

It doesn't remove any information; you can still do Reply All where 

>> # It penalizes the person with a reasonable mailer in order to coddle
>> those running brain-dead software.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. My mailer may not be brain dead, 
but it certainly works in the way I expect it to.

>> # It violates the principle of least work because complicates the
>> procedure for replying to messages.

Replying to a discussion group should go to the list, not the 
individual person. After all, you're subscribed to the list, aren't you?

>> # It violates the principle of least surprise because it changes the 
>> way a
>> mailer works.

Reply-To is specifically defined for replying to a list. Mailers use 
it, because that's the way they work. Granted, that when a user hasn't 
come across it before then they may not be expecting it, but just 
because it is unexpected doesn't mean that it's changed it :-)

>> # It violates the principle of least damage, and it encourages a 
>> failure
>> mode that can be extremely embarrassing -- or worse.

Surely, only for messages that don't belong on a group discussion 

>> # Your subscribers don't want you to do it. Or, at least the ones who 
>> have
>> bothered to read the docs for their mailer don't want you to do it.

Personally I got the impression that there were more 'yays' than 'nays' 
in the group. Don't know if that was the case, but I only recalled 
seeing two individual's -1 votes.


A good description of some of these disadvantages (largely cut and 
pasted into the original message).

I suspect that there are some mailing lists where the preferable mode 
is to reply to individuals (for example, the *.forsale.* newsgroups 
spring to mind). But a mailing list which is actually a discussion list 
should be in the open, and the default behaviour should be to discuss 
ideas in the open.

Hopefully, but putting together e-mails and discussing both pros and 
cons, and letting the others read through them, is the best way to 
achieve a consensus for a development group. Therefore I concur with 
the Reply-To feature.

If you want to bring up any of these issues and discuss them with the 
group, reply to this message and it will go through. If you want to 
bring up any issues with me personally, then use the Reply to All/Reply 
to Group feature and delete the geronimo-dev address.



View raw message