From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/3973 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sudish Joseph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: About to-addresses and followup [poll] Date: 14 Nov 1995 23:08:39 -0500 Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science Sender: joseph@cis.ohio-state.edu Message-ID: References: <199511141553.JAA23454@galil.austnsc.tandem.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035144786 28128 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:13:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from biggulp.callamer.com (biggulp.callamer.com [199.74.141.2]) by miranova.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA19470 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:58:11 -0800 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by biggulp.callamer.com (8.6.12/8.6.9-callamer-rdw080995) with ESMTP id UAA08639 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:58:11 -0800 Original-Received: from news.cis.ohio-state.edu (news.cis.ohio-state.edu [164.107.8.50]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 05:08:42 +0100 Original-Received: from coccyx.cis.ohio-state.edu (coccyx.cis.ohio-state.edu [164.107.14.3]) by news.cis.ohio-state.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.4) with ESMTP id XAA08269; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:08:40 -0500 Original-Received: (joseph@localhost) by coccyx.cis.ohio-state.edu (8.6.7/8.6.4) id XAA18651; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:08:40 -0500 Original-To: Sten Drescher In-Reply-To: Sten Drescher's message of Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:53:49 -0600 (CST) Original-Lines: 40 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:3973 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:3973 Sten Drescher writes: > In list.ding, Sudish Joseph said: SJ> Steven L Baur writes: >>> How will gnus-auto-mail-to-author relate? SJ> It doesn't enter the picture for mailgroups. > It doesn't? Then why did Gnus CC: both Steve Baur (from the To: > header) and you (from the From: header) (before I edited the header to > remove Steve)? Traditionally, mail agents have provided (at least) 2 forms of the "reply" function with respect to who gets copies of the reply. The first form is where you wish to reply to only the sender(s) of the message, ignoring all others who received a copy of the same message. GNUS binds this action to `r' in the summary. The second form is where you reply to everyone who received a copy of the original message + the sender(s). GNUS binds this to `f' in the summary. Every MUA I've seen supports this distinction. The important thing to note here is that the sender always gets a copy of the reply, unless the user explicitly deletes her address. GNUS breaks an important element in this with it's behaviour w.r.t. a user pressing `f' in a group where to-address is defined--everyone _except_ the sender receives a copy. Very weird and confusing, IMO. gnus-auto-mail-to-author fills a different need. Unlike in mail (or mailing lists, which are _NOT_ newsgroups, though we're lucky enough to have a common interface to both), netiquette demands that you read the group that you post a question to. In such a situation, it is superfluous to email a copy of the article you've posted back to the author. In some cases, it is useful to CC: a copy--unreliable/slow newsfeeds, faster transmission, etc. This is where gnus-auto-mail-to-author comes in. Or you could 'agrep -d defun gnus-auto-mail-to-author gnus-msg.el' and see that it only occurs in functions that post to USENET. :) -Sudish