Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] RFC: reply-to address default to LAD
From: Alex Burton (burtona_AT_ERE.UMontreal.CA)
Date: Thu Mar 16 2000 - 17:06:25 EST
Hello List,
I'm the (quite silent) list owner and have been following with
moderate interest the reply-to affair. The debate is a hot one that
goes back to the earliest times and does not seem to want to die.
Maybe it's some sort of development crisis for every list, meaning
some "maturity" is approaching for LAD. Great!
Those very interested in the topic should also read the canonical
response, "Reply-To Munging Considered Useful"...
http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml
I personally have no preference; never had a problem in dealing with
any of the philosophies.
I cannot remember what lead LAD to be configured as it is, but i
certainly don't claim to "know" how it should be. If most people want
to change it, I will.
But... I *do not* want to manage a vote on this! If a proponent of
change can gather enough signatures (50%+1) and forward me that list,
i will go dig in majordomo config and change it.
I think we can go back to linux audio issues.
Alex.
At 4:22 PM -0500 3/16/00, eli+@gs211.sp.cs.cmu.edu wrote:
>=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Nettingsmeier wrote:
> > please comment on this.=20
>
>The canonical rant, Chip Rosenthal's "`Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful":
>http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
>--
> Eli Brandt | eli+@cs.cmu.edu | http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~eli/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Mar 17 2000 - 00:42:48 EST