That would be very lucky indeed, I doubt that, I think I'm just starting a new religious war. However I tried to cater to the two options of mailman lists which is reply to the poster or reply to the list.
Printed on recycled paper! On 04/07/2012, at 12:16, "John Levine" <[email protected]> wrote: >> If I read the code correctly, the original author's address is added to >> the Reply-to. MUA support of reply-to is a bit variable, but generally >> it is supported. > > Anyone who's run mailing lists very long knows that the setting of the > reply-to is a long running religious argument. Some people think that > it should always, ALWAYS, go to the list, and anything else is a > perversion of nature. Some think that it should always, ALWAYS, go to > the author, and anything else flies in the face of all that is right > and decent. And some think that if there is a Reply-To: in the > submitted message, the list should never, NEVER, change it and to do > so shows an unspeakable level of ignorance and depravity by the list > manager. As Dave suggested, this argument has been going on for > decades and is no closer to being settled now than it was 15 years > ago. My lists wimp out and make it a per-recipient option. > > If Franck has invented yet another thing to put in the Reply-To: > field, if nothing else he may have come up with something about which > all of the aforementioned groups agree. > > R's, > John > _______________________________________________ > dmarc-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms > (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
