On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 08:43:04AM -0800, Eugenio Diaz wrote:
> I do not understand what you are trying to say.
>
> My point is that using when I post a message to the
> list, any message in reply to my message **should
> always** go to the list by default. This is not
> happening when ever the original post has the
> "Reply-To" field set. In this case sympa does not
> re-write the field, and when somebody reply thinking
> it would go to the list, it really goes to where ever
> the original poster had set in the "Reply-To" field.
>
> I do not understand why you are suggesting things
> about procmail, etc. which has nothing to do, since
> this is not a **client** side problem; it is a list or
> server side problem. Actually I don't use a "Reply-To"
> field, and the problems arises when I want to reply to
> the posts of some other user that does use the field;
> and since I can not control how other people configure
> their email clients (much less ask them to change
> their email client configuration just so the list
> works as it "should"), it is clearly evident that it
> is a server side problem.
>
> If you have sympa well configured as per it's
> documentation, to re-write the field in every case,
> then there must be a bug in sympa, or some other
> place.
Sorry, but Chmouel and Sympa's documentation are right here. It would
be nice if Reply-To: was set to list, but unfortunately, once in a while,
someone comes with a badly configured autoresponder, or autovacation
responder, and then things get *really* ugly. I mean, hundreds of messages
add up until the list manager wakes up (usually someone calls him on the
phone) hand kill the broken subscription.
Of course, you cant always try to be smart and add filters to you mail
list manager, but eventually things will blow up anyway.
I've experienced such problems 2 or 3 times before and I can tell you
it's really embarrassing, esp. for the list admin.
S.
--
St�fane Fermigier, Tel: 06 63 04 12 77 (mobile).
<www.linbox.com> - <www.aful.org> - <www.linux-center.org>.
"In its pure form, Pascal is a toy language, suitable for teaching but not
for real programming." Brian Kernighan.
