From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 83270 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2016 05:51:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 83257 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2016 05:51:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=appeared, fuzzy, agents, Hx-spam-relays-external:64.59.134.9 X-HELO: smtp-out-no.shaw.ca Received: from smtp-out-no.shaw.ca (HELO smtp-out-no.shaw.ca) (64.59.134.9) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 05:51:22 +0000 Received: from kylheku.com ([24.85.175.81]) by shaw.ca with SMTP id Y5NGbvXvrXHJlY5NHbcZkt; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 23:51:20 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=Ffh1/926 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=WiYoHcCliNeVponEdG0Ckg==:117 a=WiYoHcCliNeVponEdG0Ckg==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=7z1cN_iqozsA:10 a=psK_IwO8VmKLbefIiNMA:9 Received: from www-data by kylheku.com with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1bY5NF-0006mD-Bh; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 22:51:17 -0700 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Please explain how to add to a thread in this mailing list X-PHP-Originating-Script: 501:rcmail.php MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 08:00:00 -0000 From: Kaz Kylheku Cc: tayloth@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <2e354997-38d0-93b4-9f18-1501419dc846@gmail.com> References: <2e354997-38d0-93b4-9f18-1501419dc846@gmail.com> Message-ID: <36fb8ad1a5844d58fd88dd3b47ea630c@mail.kylheku.com> X-Sender: kaz@kylheku.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.2 X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfF0JwNCKzrW9gfhIAggeszVYHFxNZFPTKVckpVngZfUOHcyzmMQDOhcSOAFARh1IuIK09kxVL3t4BzjiTWlS+8WIq6IN8Fu2wjqgdGyYI0t+8CYwnaiD 1rPICP17OKxUzYJhPNUmngHoAtyKIqEM1EpBtgqb0G0Wfd0vgZ9ETXa+oyAZ4rwdJa9y/wyMcsrwEQ== X-SW-Source: 2016-08/txt/msg00209.txt.bz2 On 11.08.2016 17:44, Thomas Taylor wrote: > Thank you for responding to my post. I think I asked the wrong > question. What I really want to know is how to use this mailing list > and others like it. I'm new at this, and can't find any instructions > anywhere. Such lists must have become part of the culture, and I must > have missed school that day. I'm able to create a post, but don't know > how to reply to one. On pretty much any mailing list, you can use "reply all". The most important thing that is going wrong on your end is that your replies are lacking a References: header which cites the Message-ID: values obtained from postings in the thread. These message ID references are actually what organizes the message objects into threads; it's how mail user agents and archivers can reconstruct the conversation tree. > Somehow I got the feeling that I should only reply > to the mailing list, rather than directly to the person (like you) who > responded to my post. Some mailing lists (like this one) are configured such that when you reply to a list posting that you received from the list robot, a list reply occurs whether or not you use "reply" or "reply all". This is because the mailing list robot rewrites the From: headers of the postings which it replicates so that it appears to be the author. This is very useful when lists are expected to be used by kindergarten children rather than grown-ups, because it steers the users to the common behavior of keeping the conversation in the list, without those users having to understand e-mail, mailing lists, or which reply button to use. (In some modern e-mail clients, a third way of replying has also appeared, namely "reply list", I just want to mention. It's an unnecessary feature with an unclear justification that appears to emanate from a deep-rooted misunderstanding of e-mail.) "Reply all" works in most circumstances, regardless of how mailing lists are configured. In the classic mailing list that doesn't rewrite From: lines, nor assert the Reply-To: header, you must use "Reply All", otherwise the reply will only go to the originator. "Reply All" also honors the Cc: line. Your reply is targetted to everyone in the To: and Cc:, which might include some parties who are not subscribers of the mailing list, but are "in the loop" of that particular conversation. > I don't get responses via email, and don't even > know if I should. If you're subscribed to the list, you should see them; if you aren't, there is some mail delivery problem. > Instead, I check for them periodically on the web > page for the mailing list archive. If I find a response, I don't know > the right way to reply. Replying via the archive is difficult, because it's not set up for that. Some better archivers have such a feature; I use one called "Lurker" on my mailing lists. You can simply click on a reply button in the web archive, and it redirects to your configured mail program, passing the original text and other pieces of information as URL parameters. If I want to reply to a conventionally archived mailing list posting, I copy the raw text version. Then do some editing to restore certain masked syntax like "foo dot bar" to "foo.bar" and "foo at bar" to "foo@bar", in the headers only. I also take care to edit the mbox-format "From ..." line to include the colon after the From, as is required in the regular RFC 822 format. Then I telnet to port 25 of my mail server, compose an envelope from and to myself, and copy and paste that raw e-mail as the SMTP DATA. It arrives in my inbox as if the list had sent it to me; and I can reply to it in the conventional way. Sometimes this method generates a Cc: to the list owner; that has to be removed, either when composing or when editing the raw text before SMTP. I have the feeling you might be cutting and pasting quoted text from the archive and composing new messages, which is why your replies are lacking the References: header. The archiver is able to infer that this is going on, and is threading your replies anyway, under a node marked "". It's probably figuring this out based on some heuristics involving the common Subject: line and perhaps some fuzzy matching on pieces of quoted text. [I'm adding you to the Cc: list in hopes that perhaps direct mail delivery from me-to-you will work, since you aren't getting list traffic.] -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple