From kmail-devel  Sun Nov 30 19:05:27 2003
From: Michael Pye <mdpye () ntlworld ! com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:05:27 +0000
To: kmail-devel
Subject: Re: Ideas on Reply-To-List
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kmail-devel&m=107021941530452

On Sunday 30 November 2003 18:09, Martijn Klingens wrote:

> > Yes, but the labels and default *are* important in order to avoid
> > confusing users. Technically speaking, "Reply to List" keeps the
> > automagic behaviour of 3.1, and therefore it is currently mislabeled,
> > it's functionality matches that of a general purpose reply while the
> > "Reply to Sender" currently labeled "Reply" is far more specific...
>
> Yeah, I thought about this a bit more, and if the default reply action
> would be 'reply to list' and the 'reply to sender' option would be added as
> secondary it would probably work more intuitive.
>
> And as an added bonus it improves upon the KDE 3.1 behaviour in that it
> also works for lists that don't set the reply-to header, like many non-kde
> lists still do.

Indeed. Evolution rather than revolution is going to make the most people 
happy here I think.

> Well, then you should CC kmail@, because I'm not a KMail developer, I'm
> only voicing my own opinion :)

My apologies, I forgot and just hit reply! :/

MP

_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail