I feel we're getting a tad bit off topic from my original inquiry. Does
anyone have an answer for me? Thanks.
On Dec 5, 2007 8:42 AM, massimo sandal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> rex ha scritto:
> > massimo sandal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-04 09:18]:
> >> On a related note, I *hate* that hitting "reply" uses the mail address
> >> of the parent poster, instead than that of the mailing list. The scipy
> >> and the gentoo mailing list (two other examples I know) behave more
> >> properly. Is this a sourceforge quirk?
> >
> > The list follows RFC 2822. The Reply-To header is intended to be
> > created by the originator of the message. List software that
> > overwrites the Reply-To header destroys the function it's intended
> > for.
> >
> > There's an excellent essay on this at:
> >
> > http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful<http://woozle.org/%7Eneale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful>
> >
> > Mailman implements RFC 2369, which is intended to address this
> > issue. If you want replies to go to the list, I suggest that you
> > use a mail client that follows RFC 2369. If you choose to use old
> > software that doesn't recognize the List-Post header, please don't
> > complain about software that follows RFC standards.
>
> Thanks for the article. I read it, and I must say I disagree. This is
> the tricky part:
>
> "Your list software is not "the author of the message", so it must not
> set or in any way meddle with the Reply-To header. "
>
> That's what I think is wrong. When interacting with a mailing list, I
> assume I'm not interacting just with you or others. I'm receiving mails
> *from the ML* and sending mails *to the ML*. Not receiving mails from
> Alice and sending mails to Bob.
>
> In other words: A ML, in my experience, is not different from a public
> forum. When I hit "reply" on a forum, the post goes on the forum, not on
> the mailbox of the previous poster.
>
> I'm all for standards and for consistent behaviour and I understand the
> logic behind that article; what the authors of the RFC got wrong, in my
> opinion, it considering a mailing list just as a gigantic CC: by
> disconnected people instead than of a forum-like object. The fact both
> use the mail protocol doesn't change the fact they're different objects.
>
> But of course that's only a philosophical problem. Thanks to the article
> I also discovered that "reply to all" sends mail both to the ML and the
> original sender (Never bothered to try, my fault). Although I find it a
> little funny.
>
> m.
>
> --
> Massimo Sandal
> University of Bologna
> Department of Biochemistry "G.Moruzzi"
>
> snail mail:
> Via Irnerio 48, 40126 Bologna, Italy
>
> email:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> tel: +39-051-2094388
> fax: +39-051-2094387
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-users mailing list
> Matplotlib-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
Matplotlib-users mailing list
Matplotlib-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
