From 088e150e0498e7118066691c32f5ee8dafc58f9c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jesse Rosenthal Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:24:21 +2000 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH] Restore original keybinding ('r' = reply-to-all) --- 6d/ec2e6130e75279b86df9111d6acedc3f39de5b | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 107 insertions(+) create mode 100644 6d/ec2e6130e75279b86df9111d6acedc3f39de5b diff --git a/6d/ec2e6130e75279b86df9111d6acedc3f39de5b b/6d/ec2e6130e75279b86df9111d6acedc3f39de5b new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7bc187738 --- /dev/null +++ b/6d/ec2e6130e75279b86df9111d6acedc3f39de5b @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569D7431FD2 + for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:24:02 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: 0 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] + autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id UiUJmkLRv6Id for ; + Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:24:01 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from smtpauth.johnshopkins.edu (smtpauth.johnshopkins.edu + [128.220.160.201]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30F2E431FB6 + for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:24:01 -0700 (PDT) +X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true +X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ak4JAPl17E8KoSES/2dsb2JhbABFtQEDgi6CGAEBBAFuAg4LCw0LCSUPASwbBgESG4drsDeJBIs3ZoUkA5sqA40D +X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,492,1336363200"; d="scan'208";a="176807767" +Received: from unknown (HELO watt) ([10.161.33.18]) + by ipex4.johnshopkins.edu with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; + 28 Jun 2012 11:23:51 -0400 +Received: from jkr by watt with local (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from ) + id 1SkGZx-0007dk-9L; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:24:21 -0400 +From: Jesse Rosenthal +To: David Bremner , + Jameson Graef Rollins , + Carl Worth , notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: [PATCH] Restore original keybinding ('r' = reply-to-all) +In-Reply-To: <87hatwqoz9.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +References: <1340815565-21083-1-git-send-email-cworth@cworth.org> + <87obo4zljq.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> + <87hatwqoz9.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+113~gde05574 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.1.50.1 + (i686-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:24:21 -0400 +Message-ID: <87ehozmpcq.fsf@jhu.edu> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:24:02 -0000 + +On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, David Bremner wrote: +> My bias is probably apparent in that I pushed the original patch... + +And mine in that the first thing I did in my .emacs, back in 2009 or so, +was write a reply-to-sender function, and reverse the behavior. In fact, +I just got around to using the built-in behavior in the last couple of +weeks or so. + +> I think the there is potential for unfortunate mistakes with either set +> of bindings. On the one hand sending replies to unintended people can be +> very embarrassing. + +Or something close to career-threatening. If you are in an office +situation with non-technical folks, which I am, and which more and more +of our users will likely be, replying-all accidentally can be quite +dire. The deans and the chair of my department frequently send out +requests for votes or comments to the whole department or faculty. In +many cases, the information requested is ridiculously confidential for +the medium; an accidental reply-all would be -- and I'm not overstating +-- disastrous. Incidences of this are rare, because it's not the default +in most standard clients. Even those coming from mutt or gnus are likely +to be surprised. + +If it's not obvious, I'm pretty strongly against Carl's roll-back. I +could, of course, just uncomment my old correction in my .emacs, but I +think it's a change that could hurt users. Those who are more likely to +prefer the reply-all behavior are more likely to be able to change the +defaults. Those who aren't likely to change the defaults are more likely +to be bitten, badly, by a default reply-all behavior. + +> On the other hand, forgetting to reply to the group can also be +> problematic. + +True that. My solution to this has been to write what I call a +"smart-reply" function -- it replies-all when you want it to, and +replies-to-sender the rest of the time. It's pretty simple, and I sent +it into the list before[0], but the basic functionality is that I give +it a list of to: addresses that I will want to reply-all to by default +(essentially, my mailing lists), and those will, by default, reply +all. Others will by default be reply-to-sender. I realize this +complicates the setup a bit, but it makes everyday use quite easy. + +Best, + +Jesse + +[0] id:"87hay8xdoe.fsf@jhu.edu" + -- 2.26.2