After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 309690 - need toolbar, context menu entries for reply to list
need toolbar, context menu entries for reply to list
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
2.2.x (obsolete)
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-07-07 09:13 UTC by Mikel Ward
Modified: 2006-08-26 07:01 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.9/2.10



Description Mikel Ward 2005-07-07 09:13:35 UTC
Please describe the problem:
To me, making "Reply All" perform a reply to mailing list where the original
message was received from a mailing list seems sensible (bug 238200).

Failing this, the only way to reply to a mailing list is by pressing Control-L.

There must be an easy way to reply to a mailing list.  If bug 238200 is a
WONTFIX, then there must be a main toolbar item and a right-click context menu
added for the same thing that Control-L does.

Steps to reproduce:


Actual results:


Expected results:


Does this happen every time?


Other information:
Comment 1 André Klapper 2005-07-07 11:55:08 UTC
"reply to list" has been removed in 2.2 from the context menu to get rid of 
those hundreds of items in the context menu.

"ctrl + l" *IS* an easy way to reply to list. it's even more easy then using the 
context menu with a mouse since you have to use the keyboard to write your email 
directly after pushing "ctrl + l", so you do not have to change from mouse to 
keyboard.

yeah, i know, many people aren't content with the decision, but that's normal 
when removing items... :-(

WONTFIX, sorry. of course you can reopen this one here, but the missing context 
menu entry is a wontfix and the main menu button is already filed at bug 238200.

sorry. but thanks for reporting, anyway... 
Comment 2 Mikel Ward 2005-07-07 12:15:44 UTC
From what I've reason on this issue tonight, I'm beginning to believe that users
should correctly set Reply-To and the default Reply action should honor this
setting (i.e. set the To field to the value of the parent message's Reply-To
field).  If not, possibly the Mail-Followup-To field should be the first
preference and the Reply-To field the second.

All I really want is for clicking on the big Reply button in the toolbar to do
The Right Thing, which is, in order of preference:
1. send to the list and copy the sender (or send to the sender and copy the
list) if the sender is not subscribed to the list and specified a preference to
be explicitly included in the recipients by use of the appropriate common header
2. send to the list if the sender sent to the list and the sender is subscribed
to the list
3. reply to all
4. reply to the sender

There could be a "Reply Privately" or similar as a secondary action to
explicitly mail only the sender (probably derived from the From address).  As
stated in bug 238200, such secondary actions can easily appear as a secondary
list on a downward-facing arrow attached to the master Reply button.

The current behavior results in me inadvertently abusing list etiquette and
having to decide whether to click "Reply", "Reply All", and now also remember a
third keyboard shortcut.

I just want the defaults to be sane.

Is there already discussion on this topic?
Comment 3 Mikel Ward 2005-07-07 13:03:59 UTC
After a closer look at what Evolution does (and realising that the two actions
are explicitly labeled "Reply to All" and "Reply to Sender"), I'm fairly
satisfied with the current state of Evolution.  I just have to retrain myself to
prefer the "Reply to All" button over the "Reply to Sender" button.

The main mailing lists that are a little problematic are the ones where there
are a significant number of Mutt and KMail users who believe strongly in the
Mail-Followup-To header.  A case could be made for Evolution to first examine
the Mail-Followup-To header as a higher preference field having the same purpose
as the Reply-To header as currently implemented.  Until then, those list users
will have to tolerate the extra implied duplicate message when they send a
message and I reply to it.