[Tutor] adding a windows registry value

[Ramchandra Apte]

I was the first person to respond actually.

On 4 August 2012 08:50, Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01 at gmail.com> wrote:

> You can use the _winreg <http://docs.python.org/library/_winreg.html>
>  module.
> I posted this message earlier but I replied to OP, not replied to all.
>
>
> On 4 August 2012 08:00, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:
>
>> On 04/08/12 06:32, Walter Prins wrote:
>>
>>> On 3 August 2012 19:35, Alan Gauld<alan.gauld at btinternet.**com<alan.gauld at btinternet.com>>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> The list doesn't care, you probably did it by hitting Reply
>>>> instead of Reply All.
>>>>
>>>> Reply replies to the person who posted. Reply All replies to all
>>>> on the list. Just like regular email.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  That's just how its set up, to mimic normal email.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well normally I expect emails from a list (being the direct sender),
>>> to go back to the sender, e.g. the list, and emails directly from a
>>> person to go back to that person.  (Differently put, I expect *any*
>>> email to by default go back to the sender, in general, unless I
>>> specify otherwise.  So if a mailing list sends me an email, my default
>>> expectation is that the mail goes back to the list, unless I specify
>>> otherwise.  This seems perfectly intuitive to me, but hey ho what the
>>> hey.  :)  )
>>>
>>
>>
>> The problem with that reasoning is that the list is *not* the sender.
>> It's just a rely that handles list management and delivery. If you reply to
>> a paper letter from Aunt Tilly, would you expect it to be delivered to the
>> postman who delivered it to you?
>>
>> There is a long, acrimonious debate about the behaviour of mailing lists.
>> Some people, like you, want the mailing list to hack the "Reply To" address
>> so that replies go back to the list instead of the sender. The biggest
>> argument in favour of that is simplicity: you just hit "Reply" on any email
>> and the reply goes to the appropriate place: the list for list mail, and
>> the actual sender for private mail.
>>
>> The biggest argument against is that it encourages a particular failure
>> mode, where the recipient goes to make a private reply, says something
>> personal or embarrassing, but forgets to change the address away from the
>> public list.
>>
>> (My personal answer to that is, carelessness is not the mailing list's
>> fault. If you are writing something private and can't be bothered checking
>> who you are sending too, that's your problem.)
>>
>> Others consider that mangling the Reply To address is an abomination, and
>> insist that it is a horrible abuse of Internet standards, and that it's no
>> big deal to just hit Reply All. Which is wrong because it's a pain in the
>> arse to get two copies of every nearly every email. (Some mailing list
>> software is smart enough to not send you a second copy, but most isn't.
>> Some mail clients are smart enough to detect duplicate emails and throw one
>> away, but most don't, and even those that do only do so *after* the email
>> has been downloaded from the server.
>>
>> Also, the problem with the "purity" behaviour is that it encourages n00bs
>> and the careless to take conversations off-list.
>>
>> It's an imperfect world, and neither solution is right all the time. I
>> have gradually moved away from the "lists should change the Reply To
>> address" camp to a third camp, which is to insist on better tools. If your
>> mail client doesn't give you a simple "Reply To List" command, then your
>> mail client is crap. Some non-crap mail programs include Thunderbird, mutt,
>> and Kmail. One crap one is apparently Gmail.
>>
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://woozle.org/~neale/**papers/reply-to-still-harmful.**html<http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html>
>>
>> which I don't entirely agree with -- the author makes claims about what
>> people want, apparently without realising that the reason for the debate is
>> that not all people want the same thing. In my opinion, he panders too much
>> to the careless and stupid -- I have negative sympathy for anyone who sends
>> private mail to a public address because they didn't bother to glance at
>> where it was going before hitting Send. And he fails to consider the
>> obvious answer that if the Reply To address is for the sender to set to
>> whatever they like, all a mailing list need do is make "you agree that
>> replies will go to the list" a condition of joining a list, and then the
>> mailing list software, acting as your agent, is entitled to mangled the
>> Reply To address.
>>
>> And of course, we still have the problem of human laziness and stupidity.
>> It is *astonishing* how many people apparently have problems with the
>> concept:
>>
>> "Before you reply to an email, decide whether you want to reply to the
>> sender alone, the group, or the mailing list."
>>
>> They'll insist on having a choice between 45 different coffees at
>> Starbucks, but can't cope with the choice between 3 different types of
>> reply.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steven
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Tutor maillist  -  Tutor at python.org
>> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
>> http://mail.python.org/**mailman/listinfo/tutor<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tutor/attachments/20120804/1b0b68bf/attachment-0001.html>