Re: Editors

[David Kastrup]

Tim Slattery <address@hidden> writes:

> Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>Tim McNamara writes:
>>
>>> Aarrgh, I forgot to send this to the list.  I will never get used to
>>> the goofy way in which the LilyPond mailing list operates, not having
>>> the Reply-To header set to the list.  It is the only mailing list I
>>> have ever been part of that doesn't have this as the default.
>>
>>http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
> Elm, which this guy loves, is an ancient, text-based email client. 
>
>>Reply-To munging does not benefit the user with a reasonable mailer. 
>>People want to munge Reply-To headers to make "reply back to the 
>>list" easy. But it already is easy. Reasonable mail programs have 
>>two separate "reply" commands: one that replies directly to the author 
>>of a message, and another that replies to the author plus all of the 
>>list recipients.
>
> I have *never* seen "reply to group" in any client I've worked with.

It is usually called "Reply All" or "Followup".

-- 
David Kastrup