[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-libc-dev] Should cli() imply a memory barrier?

From: Joerg Wunsch
Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Should cli() imply a memory barrier?
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 07:46:06 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

As Weddington, Eric wrote:

> It's pretty easy to click on "Reply All". It becomes a force of
> habit after posting on multiple mailing lists over several projects.

MUAs that understand RFC 2369 mailing list headers are supposed to
evaluate the "List-Post" address.  My Mutt doesn't, but at least, I
can configure list replies separately there.

Tweaking the Reply-To header is in general a very bad idea: it imposes
a *high* risk of personal (and really private) mails leaking to the
list instead of being sent to the intended recipient.  Been there,
seen that (with the XFree86 mailing lists about a decade ago).  Some
of the mails that accidentally escaped to the list in that situation
were really embarrasing...

For MUAs that don't understand RFC 2369 headers and cannot be
configured to reply to known mailing lists, a group reply is still the
best compromise.
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]