On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 20:05:41 -0400 (EDT) bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chuq, I totally agree. I had to "solve" a problem on one of my > lists that ended up being a fairly prolific poster had his > "Reply-to" set to his own address. The list was set so that > replies went to the list, but any reply to his messages on the > list did not, due to his "reply-to" being set. This is a standard feature (and many think a particularly good, valuable, and desirable feature) of lists which don't munge reply-to. Under the current Mailman behaviour (reply-to replacement) this behaviour would not happen in a reply-to muinging list as the poster's reply-to would be deleted and replaced by the list's reply-to. In the advocated case or reply-to extension, it also wouldn't happen, as list's address would be added to the reply-to header resulting in replies going to __BOTH__ the address the poster specifies AND the list. > IMHO, if you want replies to go to the list, they should ALWAYS go > to the list. Which they do with reply-to munging lists for both reply to replacement and reply-to extension. This doesn't change. The choice is whether to munge reply-to or not. > If they go to the user, then Reply-to could be acceptable to pass > on, I suppose. And if the list sets reply-to, why not _extend_ that reply to to enclude not only the list's address, but also the address specified by the poster? -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. [EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
