Re: Reply to list [was: Different key maps in different dired buffers]

[Bob Proulx]

Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
> > What web form? This is a mailing list.
> 
> There are many mailing lists which require you
> to register using such forms.

Sites like Gmane and Nabble have forms for you to register with their
site.  If you like you can put up a web form somewhere too.  But those
sites are not this mailing list.  The mailing list has no web forms.
The mailing list only deals with mail.

> > One sends email using your MUA mail user agent. That could be any
> > of emacs, gnus, mutt, mailx, and so on and so forth. Could be
> > anything. Which could include a web form is one if talking about
> > Gmail or Gmane.  But those are clearly web mail interfaces.
> 
> Gmane is a mail interface but it is also a replication of the
> newsreader interface and Usenet system of communication which is the
> most advanced and powerful thus far.

And Gmane does a very good job of it.  Even though I don't use them
myself they are usually my recommendation for people who do want a web
interface.  Gmane has created a very nice user interface to it.

> > Is this a good time to note that I can tell you are using the
> > newsgroup interface.  Which comes through the gnu.emacs.help
> > newsgroup. Is gatewayed by email to the mailing list. And
> > therefore I assume is incapable of CC'ing the original poster who
> > is not subscribed?
> 
> :O
> 
> You do me an injustice!
> 
> With Gnus I can send the same message to
> several newsgroups and mail addresses with one
> keystroke!
> 
> I'll double this up for you right away :)

I did get your courtesy copy.  And for the rest of the list what I
received was this in a direct email

>> The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been
>> posted to gnu.emacs.help as well.
>>...

But for *this* message here it was posted to the newsgroup.  That came
through the news to mail gateway.  And as far as anyone who follows up
here can see it only went to the mailing list.  Which means that any
CC was lost.  Which means my CC to Whitfield was lost.

While you were able to manually send me a copy it still wasn't perfect
because anyone following up to your message doesn't know that
Whitfield wasn't subscribed and is now cut out of the conversation.
That is exactly what happened with Dmitry's follow-up message.

This is the situation that Mail-Followup-To is designed to handle.
But the news to mail gateway doesn't deal with it.  I am not sure how
it would since news doesn't have the concept.

An imperfect situation.

And this doesn't even mention that your follow-ups to the mailing list
are always in-reply-to the message before the message you are replying
to and not the one it should be in reply to.  Some breakage in
postings coming through the newsgroup gateway.

> > This is a good example of one of the imperfections of the loosely
> > combined systems. ... Trying to tie them together cannot be 100%
> > perfect. But it has been this way for many years.
> 
> Man, think BIG!
> 
> It is *never* going to be "100% perfect".  The binding together of
> mailing lists, Gmane, blogs (Gwene), Usenet, RSS, and so on, all
> this is wonderful as people can use whatever interface they like!

Wonderful?  Yes!  Imperfect?  Yes. :-(

> It is just like using mpsyt instead of the crappy, commercial web
> interface to YouTube.  I'm sure there are problems with that to but
> the freedom of interface and access methods outweighs them one
> hundred to one, just as it does here!
> 
> > The canonical mailing list header to identify mailing lists is the
> > List-ID header. Not the To header.
> 
> Do all lists adhere to that?

As far as I can see.  Yes.  But I am sure there are some bad lists
somewhere that don't.

> The To header is on the contrary quite indispensible...
> 
> > Many people do prefer Newsgroups or Gmane.
> > Gmane is not really a newsgroup.
> 
> It is thousands.

It is a web mail interface to an archive of thousands of mailing
lists.  It has an user interface that looks a lot like the newsgroup
interface.  But looking like something and being something are two
different things.

> > We do already have all of those things.  Those are all
> > different. And the seams between are not completely smooth between
> > them.
> 
> They are smooth enough. With your efforts they will be even
> smoother. But the objective is not industrial smoothing but freedom
> of interface and data access!

A good time for me to say that I do wish people to be able to read and
respond using their preferred interfaces.  For me that is reading mail
with mutt and responding to mail using emacs.  I hate captured web
form interfaces where I can't use my favorite editor to craft my reply.

> > Facebook has a lot of non-free problems.  I would not recommend
> > expanding our free libre discussion onto that non-free platform.
> > It would prevent many people from participating.
> 
> We can't all but exclude ourself from a whole generation of people
> either, can we?
> 
> People use it. They are much more comfortable using it than sending
> mails. It is a sad state.  But it is the truth.

You are proposing that we make a compromise of values in order to
bring in the young generation of Facebook users?  To paraphrase the
often quoted phrase, "Those that would give up some essential liberty
for some security deserve neither."

Also the Facebook interface is designed for very short comments.  What
do you think it would do with our exchange here?  We have already lost
most people on this list who read email and are used to long
diatribes.  FB skimmers spinning the touchscreen with their finger
would have passed this by a page in from the start.  I would oppose an
FB to mailing list gateway as being generally incompatible.

> > And unless I am mistaken I believe all of those already exist and
> > are all gatewayed to the same mailing list.
> 
> Even so, on Usenet gnu.emacs.help is a newsgroup.

Yes.  A newsgroup that is gateway'd into this mailing list.  From my
perspective it is gateway'd into the mailing list because I read the
mailing list.  From your perspective the mailing list is gateway'd
into the newsgroup because you read the newsgroup.  I realize the
directionality is a matter of perspective.  I used to read the
newsgroups of USENET before the noise there became too much for me to
wade through.  Personally due to the interface differences I wish they
would not gateway between each other.  Gmane handles the mailing lists
fine because it is a web mail interface.  But newsgroup readers cannot
because they are using the newsgroup which is gateway'd to the mailing
list and there are concepts that do not transfer across them.  Such as
keeping a non-subscribed person who has requested CC's in the
discussion.  That is a mailing list concept and not a newsgroup concept.

> >> Is there a "GNU web forum" software?  On Usenet, there is
> >> rec.bicycles.tech - and here is the same thing, as a web forum!
> >> http://www.cyclebanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8
> >
> > Yes. There are many. Gmane is a good example.  And also all of the
> > web based newsgroup readers of which I am not familiar.
> 
> Gmane is *archived* online.

Gmane is an email archive and web mail interface.  A good one.  You
appear to disagree.  In what way does Gmane not meet your definition
of a web interface to the mailing list?

> Here is a forum:
> 
>     https://www.flashback.org
> 
> If we had software for such forums - I don't know if we do? - it
> would be a good thing if that software included an interface to the
> traffic here - i.e., yet another gateway!

That appears to me like a typical web forum.  (I can't really tell.  I
didn't browse more than a few pages.)  Personally I don't like web
forums.  I realize many others prefer them.  That's fine.  Each to
their own.  But let's not join incompatible technologies together into
a Frankenstein's monster.

I think for those preferring a web interface to the mailing lists that
Gmane is the best user experience available.

Bob