felipe.contreras at gmail.com
Mon Nov 7 09:59:31 PST 2011
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:56 AM, John Haxby <jch at thehaxbys.co.uk> wrote:
> On 06/11/11 19:31, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> The discussion about what this list chooses to do is pertinent to this
> In which case let it drop and let the list maintainers decide. I think
> you've made your point.
Good, just to make it clear; normal people use "reply-to-all", many of
them have no problem with it; they had to learn it for basic
communication with groups of people. If somebody thinks otherwise,
that's an opinion, not a fact, and it should be considered as such.
Therefore, it's not a reason not to remove Reply-to munging as it's
perfectly *possible* that people in this mailing list would have no
problem with it, or get used to it, like countless other mailing list.
And, as mentioned in RFC 5822, Reply-to is meant for the *author* of
the message, so if the mailing list software munges this field, it's
against the specification, and thus a hack.
Since apparently discussions regarding communication in this mailing
list "distress" the community, if somebody wants to further discuss
this, feel free to reply directly to me.
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss