freebsd vs. netbsd

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at
Thu Jun 11 07:14:58 UTC 2020

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:13:10 -0600, @lbutlr wrote:
>On 10 Jun 2020, at 23:06, Polytropon <freebsd at> wrote:
>> However, I assume that the use of "reply to all" is so convenient it
>> is often preferred to "reply to mailing list", that's why sometimes
>> replies are send "twice"…  
>A smart MUA (is there one) you have a reply button that replied sender
>if the messages was directly to you, replied to list if the message
>was from a list, and made you hit a difficult chorded sequence of 47
>keys in precise order in less than 4 seconds to reply to all.

It's not just a question of a "smart" MUA.

There are two different "smart" approaches. Depending on mailing
list settings, formatted headers of the user and the wanted result, both
have got pros and cons.

Either "reply all" or "reply" could invoke a mailing list reply in a
smart way.

However, it depends on the wanted result and the headers of the sender
and kept or overridden headers by the mailing list.

Btw. the mailing list never sends 2 replies. One reply is from the
list, the other directly from the sender. It's even possible to disable
duplicated messages by mailman, but then you'll receive a reply without
mailing list header, IOW just the reply from the sender. IOW it's a
cheap workaround, it's not smart.

A "smart" solutions always providing the mailing list header is
possible, but hard to achieve. It only works if the common goal is
defined and all pull together.

It requires agreement regarding the content of the Reply-To and
From headers.

A problem could be that some MUAs usually only provide
one of the two options, but it's required that depending on the goal
the user can chose between "reply all" or "reply" to invoke a
mailing list reply.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list