On 14/07/2011 21:13, simon haywood wrote:
I realise, seeing this list in action, that *exactly* what I want is
being done here (I think!)
We're all emailing the mailing list, and the mailing list is emailing
each of us - with both the From and Reply-To set to be the original
sender (rather than the mailing list address).
No; the Reply-To is set to the list address. At least, it is for me
- you may have your list settings configured differently (if the
list permits that).
You're right. I mis-spoke. The general point is valid still I think.
How is it done!?
Well, in this case it's done by the list software, which happens to
be Mailman. That's not really analogous to what you want to do,
although the outcome is similar. But the important thing is that the
Sender header is set to the list address, not our individual
addresses. That's what avoids it getting caught by smap filters and
the like.
Incidentally, if you're using PHP's built-in mail() function, it
will do it right by default. That is, if you explicitly pass it the
correct From and Reply-To headers (which you want to set to your
campaigners' email addresses), then it will set them appropriately
and set the Sender header to be your own server.
I'm using PHPMailer - specifically to allow me to use and authenticate
to an external smtp relay. I am passing it "From" and "Reply-To" as
different headers. But getting a curious result - as per other
branches of this thread.
In one sense, writing a form-to-email application is pretty simple.
It's not quite programming 101, but it's not rocket science either.
Nearly every popular scripting langauge (and most of the unpopular
ones, as well) either has built-in functions for sending mail or has
readily available classes and functions to do it. But knowing how to
do it is one thing; doing it right is another. Once you allow your
software to inflict itself on the wider Internet (eg, by sending
mail to arbitrary recipients) then you have an obligation to ensure
that you comply with best current practice as regards handling
errors, preventing your service being used for abuse, etc.
Of course. In this case, every input is validated and sanitised - and
the user's email is validated. Never say never, but I believe all
reasonable precautions have been taken, and errors trapped and handled.
So, if you're at all uncertain about it, then outsourcing it (eg, to
WriteToThem.com) makes a lot of sense.
Also, as Matthew has already pointed out, it really isn't a good
idea to pre-fill the content of campaign messages. MPs get a pretty
high volume of mail (both postal and electronic), and many of them
routinely disregard (or, at least, assign less importance to)
anything which appears to have not been written by the person
sending it. If you're concerned that having to use their own words
will put some less articulate campaigners off then don't be: that
can actually be a good thing. A small number of well-written,
individual messages will have far more effect than a large number of
identical or near-identical ones.
I appreciate your point. As per other branches of this thread, we
believe we've devised a good compromise.
For those reasons, I think that writing a wrapper to WriteToThem.com
may well be more effective than trying to roll your own here. You
get all the benefits of the hard work being done by someone else,
and the one thing you think is a disadvantage (the fact that it
doesn't allow pre-filled messages) is, in reality, a benefit as well.
It is, as it were, already rolled. The hard work has already been
done. I had just hit a small stumbling block when it came to using an
smtp relay other than one that I administer.
Mark
_______________________________________________
developers-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
Unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
