Re: Replying to the list (was: [1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001138]: Add strsignal(), sig2str() and str2sig() to the standard.)

[Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group]

Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote in
 <20200909093026.GA21859@localhost>:
 |Robert Elz wrote, on 09 Sep 2020:
 |> ps: this new e-mail encapsulation is still inserting bogus Reply-To \
 |> headers
 |> that request replies go only to the sender of the message ... one of the
 |> messages I sent you (Geoff) earlier (I have forgotten what it was about)
 |> was actually intended for the list, but I forgot that I needed to go
 |> manually add the list name.
 |
 |Replies should work the same way they used to[*]. If you use your
 |email client's "reply all" function the reply is to the list and to
 |the sender (and Cc's).  If you use "reply", the reply is only to the

This DKIM/DMARC mail message header mixing approach always makes
me nervous.  It is ok for me since Reply-To: is in the list of
retained headers and so i see it.  But otherwise a different
address magically springs into existence, and i always have to
look twice to assure myself.

 |sender. So if you accidentally sent a private email that was meant for
 |the list, the same would have happened before the change was made to
 |the mailing list configuration.
 |
 |[*] One small difference is that some email clients ask whether to
 |honour the Reply-To (e.g. mutt).

One nit: ..some email clients optionally ask..  (The mailx clone
i maintain needs "set reply-to-honour[=ask-yes here]", for
example.)

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)