http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml
We, Japanese, generally use the term "Mailing List" as what appends "Reply-To" Header properly to the same address. Without "Reply-To" Header, it will be called as "Mail Magazine" or something equivalent. For example, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not "mailing list" by our strict definition, because this list (address) appends "Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Header automatically, not "Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Header. *Mailing list* is something "for discussion" *Mail Magazine* is something "one-way traffic" ... explicit explanation ;-) Again and again, http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml and http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail.html ("Watch where you are sending email." section) -- Tetsuya ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) P.S. We, Japanese, are not accustomed to such lists as would not append "Reply-To" and would have no "[listname:seq-num]" prefixed subject... This is true... Cultural-conflict! :D -- On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:18:47 +0100 (BST) (Subject: Re: [VOTE] change Reply-To to go to geronimo-dev) Andrew Savory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > With the Reply-To set to the list, you don't have to remember to reply > > to all to get it to the list. > > > > Please vote. > > > > +1 from me > > Not a committer, but -1 for the following reasons: > > # It violates the principle of minimal munging. > # It provides no benefit to the user of a reasonable mailer. > # It limits a subscriber's freedom to choose how he or she will direct a > response. > # It actually reduces functionality for the user of a reasonable mailer. > # It removes important information, which can make it impossible to get > back to the message sender. > # It penalizes the person with a reasonable mailer in order to coddle > those running brain-dead software. > # It violates the principle of least work because complicates the > procedure for replying to messages. > # It violates the principle of least surprise because it changes the way a > mailer works. > # It violates the principle of least damage, and it encourages a failure > mode that can be extremely embarrassing -- or worse. > # Your subscribers don't want you to do it. Or, at least the ones who have > bothered to read the docs for their mailer don't want you to do it. > > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > > Andrew.
