Re: Lenny: which arch for a Intel Core 2 Duo?
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Ron Johnson <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 01/05/09 11:41, Kelly Clowers wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 06:47, L. V. Gandhi <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
>>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> Please reply to the list, not personally to me.
>>> Sorry. I use GMail. It doesn't use reply to it seems. I searched google
>>> use that reply-to in lists mail. But I am not successful.
>> I know what you mean. It is one of gmail's biggest failings.
>> Please suggest that they add that feature. I mention it them
>> at least once a year.
> Or ditch Gmail for something sane.
I'm puzzled as to why you consider Gmail's behaviour to be erroneous.
Using 'reply' (as opposed to 'followup'/'reply to all') should correctly address
a mail to the reply-to address (which was not set in the mail which prompted
this discussion), or faling that, to the original sender. Anything else would be
simply wrong. If it's true that Gmail does not honour reply-to, then that would
be a problem, but irrelevant given that it wasn't set in the first place.
I understand that the debian-user policy is to address only the list on
followups, but that's a different issue (and really I think anyone wanting this
sort of nonstandard behaviour ought to set mail-followup-to as god intended,
rather than relying on every poster to remember that the list has a policy
which is inverted compared to standard practice, but that's another issue
again, and certainly not worth arguing over...).
*My* problem with Gmail is that the only way to get monospaced fonts is to
add some nasty user style rules that break every now and then.