[Gpg4win-users-en] reply-to "mangling" (was: Release planning (2.0.0rc1 and 2.0.0))

Sorin Srbu sorin.srbu at orgfarm.uu.se
Thu Jun 25 12:12:44 CEST 2009

>-----Original Message-----
>From: gpg4win-users-en-bounces at wald.intevation.org
>bounces at wald.intevation.org] On Behalf Of Bernhard Reiter
>Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 11:26 AM
>To: gpg4win-users-en at wald.intevation.org
>Subject: [Gpg4win-users-en] reply-to "mangling" (was: Release planning
>and 2.0.0))
>There is a while discussion on this topic, start here:
>In short, a good email application should have a reply-to-sender
>and reply-to-group method (button, key-combination, whatever). :)
>Intevation's default policy therefore is to rely on this and
>not mangle the reply-to. However if a majority of list-users believes
>that this would make life much more easier for them, we can change
>it on a per list decision.

Our favourite mailer, Outlook, has in its default configuration a reply-, a
reply all- and a forward button. Who else would use Gpg4win? 

I vote for doing this, that is to say the reply button should put the list
address in the top-field. 

I can live with it as it is now though, it's just an annoyance. I've several
times mailed specific persons instead of the list, and only caught the error
on a random chance.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5106 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/gpg4win-users-en/attachments/20090625/3a7d7ed8/attachment.bin>

More information about the Gpg4win-users-en mailing list