Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of Alex.Huang@citrix.com
 designates 66.165.176.89 as permitted sender)
From: Alex Huang <Alex.Huang@citrix.com>
To: Animesh Chaturvedi <animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com>,
	"cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" <cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 16:49:21 -0800
Subject: [DISCUSS] Should cloudstack-dev mailing list strip "Reply-to"
 header?
Thread-Topic: [DISCUSS] Should cloudstack-dev mailing list strip "Reply-to"
 header?
Thread-Index: Ac4EzKBnSTOT+c4tTay+TjYbnH1dIw==
Message-ID: 
 <B1DF26ECC0458748AC97CECE2DA98D41012FA4A70329@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

So let me ask the question then.  Right now there's 3 people who believes t=
he agreement was cc if you know the recipient you want and it was not to ch=
ange the reply to address.  One person believes it was to change the reply-=
to address.  Anyone else who thought  that was the agreement?

Only CC: Animesh, Alex, Brett
Change reply-to: Sheng

--Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 11:52 AM
> To: Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCE] cloudstack-dev mailing list has stripped "Reply-t=
o"
> header
>=20
>=20
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 9:13 PM
> > To: Sheng Yang; Brett Porter
> > Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCE] cloudstack-dev mailing list has stripped "Reply=
-
> to"
> > header
> >
> > The current behavior is not the one I've signed up for.  Maybe I
> misunderstood
> > what was being said myself.  I agree with Brett.  I thought the idea wa=
s
> people
> > can cc people directly if they know who they want to get the attention =
of
> but
> > the mailing list is still the reply-to address.  You are still responsi=
ble for the
> > topics and tags you're interested in.
> > This convention would have made it easier to filter tags and for any ma=
il
> that
> > cced you to a folder.  The recipient should still scan mail subjects wi=
thout
> tags
> > occasionally but they don't have to worry about missing emails because
> they
> > know full well that if something needs your attention the sender would
> have
> > cced you.
> >
> > As the way this is implemented, if you and brett replied to an email
> separately
> > and I replied to your email, Brett is not included anyways so again it =
loses
> any
> > type of advantage you think this implementation gains.
> >
> > --Alex
> [Animesh>] I was also under the impression that  there is no change to
> default reply to mailing list and we are just agreeing to cc
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 3:06 PM
> > > To: Brett Porter
> > > Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] cloudstack-dev mailing list has stripped "Rep=
ly-
> to"
> > > header
> > >
> > > Hi Brett,
> > >
> > > The "reply-to" header is exactly what bothering us. It make us go
> > > through every thread to check if it's the one we've involved or not.
> > >
> > > And, people would able to update their mail client filter to the get
> > > the result they want when we're using current policy, but they can't
> > > get the mail they involved when we enforce "reploy-to" policy.
> > >
> > > I know it's an enforcement for new member reply in the public, but I
> > > believe it's better(and not that hard) to be spontaneously.
> > >
> > > --Sheng
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Brett Porter <brett@apache.org> wrote=
:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I hate jumping in after the fact, but I wanted to check if that was
> > > > the result
> > > everyone was expecting? What I understood from the previous thread
> was
> > > that the community would build up a convention of CCing people to get
> > > their attention, not that the default reply-to would be changed.
> > > >
> > > > I'm confused by the claim that the list stripped To/CC, as I can se=
e
> > > > examples
> > > where they were retained when used [1] [2]. When I reply-to-all on
> > > those messages, they are also retained as CCs. Is that not what you w=
ere
> > seeing?
> > > >
> > > > The thing that wasn't retained was a CC of the sender if you
> > > > reply-to-all,
> > > but a better alternative to that would be for people wishing to have
> > > that behaviour to CC themselves on mails they send to the list. I kno=
w
> > > at least one person said they didn't want to be CC'd on list mails,
> > > and they could then choose whether or not that happens.
> > > >
> > > > The reason reply-to the list is the default is so that the default
> > > > mode of
> > > operation is communicating with the entire community publicly. It is
> > > probably most helpful to newer members of the list that aren't yet
> > > familiar with the conventions. This change will particularly trip up
> > > those that are new to the list, but familiar with other ASF lists
> > > where reply-to is predominantly set. If you intend to continue with
> > > the change, you may want to consider adding a message trailer that
> > > reminds readers of the difference, and points them to the mailing lis=
t
> > guidelines.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Brett
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cloudstack-
> > >
> dev/201302.mbox/raw/%3CCA+96GG4YVnrYBjMy4yRQwtpqZLKLYeb39n1kq
> > > WCf06Yswx_23w@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > > [2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cloudstack-
> > > dev/201302.mbox/raw/%3C20130205083909.GC5795@cloud-2.local%3E
> > > >
> > > > On 06/02/2013, at 8:44 AM, Sheng Yang <sheng@yasker.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi all,
> > > >>
> > > >> Based on the discussion in
> > > >>
> > >
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.devel/9216 ,
> > > >> I've requested Infra team to disable the list from adding a
> > > >> reply-to header pointing to the list, which means, from now on,
> > > >> every thread you participated, would keep you in the thread, by
> > > >> sending mail to you directly(when others are "replying all").
> > > >>
> > > >> So there is one new rule need to be emphasized: Do remember to
> > > >> reply
> > > all.
> > > >>
> > > >> I've updated the mailing list guide line to include:
> > > >>
> > > >> <quote>
> > > >> Always use "Reply to All", to keep everyone and mailing list in th=
e
> > > >> thread. Don't be afraid to make a correction if you used "Reply" t=
o
> > > >> single people involved by mistake.
> > > >> </quote>
> > > >>
> > > >> I hope this movement would make the communication more effective.
> > > >>
> > > >> PS: you may want to update your mailing list filter, and set your
> > > >> mail client's to "Reply All" by default.
> > > >>
> > > >> --Sheng
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Brett Porter
> > > > brett@apache.org
> > > > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
> > > > http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
> > > > http://twitter.com/brettporter
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >