Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all (was: Need Help w. PIP!)
ben+python at benfinney.id.au
Wed Sep 9 08:09:34 CEST 2015
Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> writes:
> On 9/8/2015 6:19 PM, Cody Piersall wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> > <PointedEars at web.de <mailto:PointedEars at web.de>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Cody Piersall wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please respond to the list as well as the person you're
> > > > actually talking to. It works out better for everyone that way.
> > > > (You should just have to "reply all" instead of "reply").
> [Reply] should send the reply to the list.
The function named “reply” normally means “reply individually to the
author”, and that's how it needs to stay.
The “reply to the list” function is present in many mail clients, and
works fine for this mailing list; Google Mail seems to be a notable
exception that its users should ask to change.
> > Some people email the list, but aren't subscribed to it.
People who fit that description are not participants in the forum, so
excluding them from forum replies is the right thing to do.
> > So I guess a better rule is to just reply-to-all for the OP?
> Please no, not as a routine.
\ “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, |
`\ calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from |
_o__) building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 |
More information about the Python-list