My last "contribution", I think. _Conventions_ (such as top-posting versus inline-replies, or attachments allowed versus attachments disallowed) do vary from list to list. _Standards_, such as RFC2822 or MIME, don't refer to any particular list, but to _all_ email.
We have to hope that the people formulating standards have thought carefully before finalising those standards, so that they make sense, and work well. At this point it really has come to a matter of opinion: some think RFC2822 makes sense as a standard for email, and others don't. My belief is that this standard (RFC2822) has been carefully constructed to reflect what people want, according to decades of experience, and as such it does make sense. Indeed, it replaced RFC822 after that no longer matched what people want. I think that this crux of this conversation now reduces to: - Everybody wants it to be easy for a reply to a list message to go only to the list - There exist standard headers to facilitate this, which the list software sets correctly, and which conformant mail clients interpret correctly. RFC2369 dates from 1998, and RFC2919 from 2001, so implementors have had a while now to add support. - Certain commonly used mail clients do not understand those headers (with one in particular having an open bug with a known-working patch to add this support!) - Users of those mail clients which lack support for these headers wish the list to contravene the standard by subverting another header, which serves a different purpose, but which their mail clients do understand, instead of fixing their mail client or switching to a conformant one, of which many are available. My solution: Two opensuse-factory mailing lists, one which sets Reply-To and the other which doesn't. May the best approach win ;)
