Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[ This was getting pretty long and a bit repetitive, so I trimmed it brutally.  It's still pretty long, sigh. ] On 2/6/2018 2:09 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > But:  in my work contexts, it is quite common for a discussion to span > > two teams.  Again, a "reply" that goes to the List-Post

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > On 2/5/2018 12:29 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > [various stuff, citation line preserved to make a point below] > You don't mention what your "smart reply" does with To and CC > addresses.  Discards them, I assume? Yes. It's intended to do what a certain large group

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 2/5/2018 12:29 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > The question I asked, which you misinterpreted completely IMO, and > Grant partially agreed with is "Does an algorithm which 1. gives > overriding precedence to Reply-To, 2. otherwise if List-Post is > present directs it there, and 3. finally

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > Just because an MUA isn't on the Internet, does not mean that it > shouldn't play by the same or very similar rules. If it doesn't DWIM, I don't use it. But that's not the same as talking about conformance of clients. The question is whether the MUA

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > If you have "smart reply" as a separate function, yes.  If you have > the typical "Reply" and "Reply All", and the mailing list software > sets "Reply-To: ", then replying to the author is awkward and > error-prone. Sure, but in this thread we all agree that Reply-To

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Does it ave the same Message-ID though? According to RFC, Message-ID is an originator field, and MUST be present and MUST be unique. The MUA or submission agent should add it before handing off to the MTA. As a last resort the MTA may add it. If it gets past the MTA

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > On 2018-01-29 23:51, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > ... [ Reply-To ] should have a checkbox "same as my > > From address." > > Oh, great, now I'll rreecceeiivvee eevveerryytthhiinngg > ttwwiiccee.. No, that's not the way Reply-To works. Anyway, the point is

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

--On 30. Januar 2018 um 13:33:35 -0700 Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: On 01/26/2018 09:41 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: I was suggesting that one way to address that complaint would be for your mail client to detect the duplication and hide the duplicate copies.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

--On 30. Januar 2018 um 12:46:20 -0700 Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: Mutt and Gnus have had that for as long as I can remember. But there's always a huge constituency for a one-button do-what-I-mean function. "It's obvious what I want, why doesn't this

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/30/2018 6:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 01/30/2018 04:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: >> (that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List) >> >> Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies >> will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 06:46 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > > I wonder if that hints at another option when munging the From: (i.e. > for DMARC reason).  Add the author (read: the original From:) as a > Reply-To and set the mailing list as From:.  That would provide the > original author

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 07:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: No. In the User A case messages from the list will have a Reply-To with the list address and replies (ignoring the pathological recent Thunderbird) will go to the list as you say, but in the User B case, messages from the list will have a Reply-To

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 05:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: [ Feh. My biggest MUA<->ML nuisance is that I don't have a way to force replies to use the custom From address that I use for that mailing list. I'm assuming that you're talking about the address that address that direct replies go to. My

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 04:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: > > (that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List) > > Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies > will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list with > "Reply-To: " replies will go to user

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[ Feh.  My biggest MUA<->ML nuisance is that I don't have a way to force replies to use the custom From address that I use for that mailing list.  Grant, sorry for the dup. ] On 1/30/2018 3:42 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > On 01/30/2018 03:11 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: >> There are

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 03:11 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: There are those who would consider it a problem if your mailing list is (mis:-)configured to add "Reply-To: " if there is no existing "Reply-To". I don't see how the MLM's behavior (good / bad / indifferent) has anything to do with this being a

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 02:43 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > On 01/30/2018 03:02 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: >> Does it ave the same Message-ID though? I suppose if I reply-both on >> this one, you'll have an easy way to check. > > Yes, they frequently do have the same Message-ID.  About the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 03:09 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: To answer my own question, the one I got back from the list has the same message id that was sent out so a t least in this particular delivery chain nothing mangled it. ;-) In that case keeping a list of the N last delivered message ids and

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 03:02 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: Does it ave the same Message-ID though? I suppose if I reply-both on this one, you'll have an easy way to check. Yes, they frequently do have the same Message-ID. About the only time they don't is if the MLM changes the Message-ID. (sending to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 03:04 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: Even getting agreement on what constitutes an ambiguous case might be tough. Agreement between people may be problematic. I think it will be quite simple to get people to define what they like and dislike. Which will likely differ from what other

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/30/2018 2:09 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > The only problem then is list mail will seldom land in the list > sub-folders as the direct replies should almost always come first and > land in inbox. That depends entirely on how you design your filters.  My Mailman filter looks for From, To, CC,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

And PPS my maildropex(7) has ''' Check if the Message-ID: header in the message is identical to the same header that was recently seen. Discard the message if it is, otherwise continue to filter the message: ‘reformail -D 8000 duplicate.cache‘ if ( $RETURNCODE == 0 )

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/30/2018 1:33 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > So I'm curious how the Reply-To: being set to the same thing as the > From: causes any problems here. There are those who would consider it a problem if your mailing list is (mis:-)configured to add "Reply-To: " if there is no existing

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

To answer my own question, the one I got back from the list has the same message id that was sent out so a t least in this particular delivery chain nothing mangled it. In that case keeping a list of the N last delivered message ids and discarding ones already on the list shouldn't be too

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/30/2018 11:46 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > The more we discuss this and the longer that this thread goes on, > makes me think that this should be a user configurable action that the > MUA prompts the user for what they want to reply to in the ambiguous case. Even getting

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 03:27 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > About the only thing that I can think to do would be to have my LDA > deliver a copy of the post from the mailing list to a script that would > search the Inbox for messages with the same Message-ID and then > retroactively remove

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/29/2018 10:14 AM, Chip Davis wrote: I have a constant problem with well-meaning, but essentially ignorant, email users who, upon seeing a "Reply To:" field in their MUA's setup screen, dutifully fill it in with their email address. I too have seen people fill in the Reply-To in the MUA

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 01:43 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: Dep. on your MDA setup, list replies could go to list folder and off-list copies: to main inbox. In which case I think that thunderbird plug-in would not work either, even if you still have both on disk. That's the exact scenario (save for the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/30/2018 02:33 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > ...  I'm also > not aware of much that Thunderbird can do. There is/was a plug-in for finding duplicates. It only works if you have both, if you already deleted the off-list copy that's no different from what you get with procmail.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/26/2018 09:41 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: I was suggesting that one way to address that complaint would be for your mail client to detect the duplication and hide the duplicate copies. That sounds good in theory. But the practice that I'm exposed to doesn't work out well. I usually

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/28/2018 09:40 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: OK. But I'm not saying "always." I'm saying that this would DTRT for me a very large proportion of the time, and for AOLers, about 100% of the time to 6 sigmas. I think that's a question of corpus. DTRT for you is different from DTRT for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 2018-01-29 23:51, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: ... [ Reply-To ] should have a checkbox "same as my From address." Oh, great, now I'll rreecceeiivvee eevveerryytthhiinngg ttwwiiccee.. Dima -- Mailman-Users mailing list

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/29/2018 11:01 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: > > So for the general case where you might have gotten a message directly, > and through list A, and through list B, the result is random unless you > pay careful attention to how you got this particular copy of the message. If you received the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/29/2018 9:56 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > (And that's another of the key items:  the "Reply-To: " > > configuration makes it *difficult* to reply to the author, and that > > seems just plain rude.) > > Why? Nobody is talking about taking away anybody's Reply-To-Author > function,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > make everybody happy That's a longer way of expressing "right." I'm *still* not interested in that. > I can only hope that whatever standards develop make both "reply to > author" and "reply to all" convenient. No MUA is going to remove either of those functions. >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > You were complaining that in some list configurations you will tend to > get multiple copies of a message - one directly to you, and one via the > list. > > I was suggesting that one way to address that complaint would be for > your mail client to detect the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Chip Davis writes: > I have a constant problem with well-meaning, but essentially > ignorant, email users who, upon seeing a "Reply To:" field in their > MUA's setup screen, dutifully fill it in with their email address. > Then they complain that even though they "replied to the list", >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/28/2018 8:40 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > I believe that many users think > of mailing lists as fundamentally different from personal email, and > they would like their MUAs to distinguish automatically. This > algorithm, I believe, would do a pretty good job of that. This particular

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Apologies for mangling my description of the problem. The senders with the hard-coded "Reply-To:" are not the ones complaining that their emails aren't going to the list, it's those who thought they replied to the list who complain that it went as a private message back to the OP. IMHO, all

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

I am loathe to weigh in on this architectural design discussion, but it seems to ignore the PEBCAK effect. I admin about a dozen _discussion_ Mailman lists as a mitzvah for various organizations I'm fond of, none of which are well-populated with computer scientists. Exhibit A is the number

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > I want "Reply" to go to the author, and "Reply All" to go to the author, > the list, and any other To or CC destinations.  I simply can't > understand any other answer.  I don't understand why anybody feels a > need for "Reply List". Your preference is noted, but you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > On 01/24/2018 01:50 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > 2. Else if there is a List-Post, address the message to List-Post. > > I don't think that it's appropriate to always prefer the List-Post over > the From ~> Reply-To. OK. But I'm not saying

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/24/2018 9:19 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > I understand your logic.  It seems reasonable enough.  I still > disagree with it.  -  By the way the sun is purple.  ;-)  We can agree > to disagree. I think that's probably the end result :-) >> And yes, those are all very real

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 2018-01-24 02:50, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: I'd appreciate if those who have strong opinions on this would take a look at the analysis below and tell me if I'm missing something. While I don't have a strong opinion, getting two copes of the same message (usual "reply all") behaviour is

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/24/2018 09:16 PM, Jordan Brown wrote: I don't understand this statement. Or, I don't understand how it disagrees with what I said. I don't really care whether the MUA has a "Reply List" button that does something list-specific. "Reply" should go to the author; "Reply All" should go to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/24/2018 4:48 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > On 01/24/2018 10:40 AM, Jordan Brown wrote: >> If a message had only List-Post and From, that wouldn't get the >> result that I would want.  I would want Reply to go to the author. As >> a list member, I consider it an absolute

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 1/24/2018 12:50 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > I think there's an obvious algorithm for "smart single reply": > > 1. If there is a Reply-To, address the message to Reply-To. > 2. Else if there is a List-Post, address the message to List-Post. > 3. Else address the message to From. (If

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/24/2018 10:40 AM, Jordan Brown wrote: On 1/24/2018 12:50 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: I think there's an obvious algorithm for "smart single reply": 1. If there is a Reply-To, address the message to Reply-To. 2. Else if there is a List-Post, address the message to List-Post. 3. Else

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/24/2018 01:50 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: I'd appreciate if those who have strong opinions on this would take a look at the analysis below and tell me if I'm missing something. If not, maybe I'll write up a BCP (non-standards-track RFC[1]) so it's on record. See my comments inline

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

I'd appreciate if those who have strong opinions on this would take a look at the analysis below and tell me if I'm missing something. If not, maybe I'll write up a BCP (non-standards-track RFC[1]) so it's on record. This proposal actually has a history going back to about 2005. I didn't do

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 04:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Its worse than that: what about people who intentionally set the Reply > To header on *non-mailing list* emails? Then you won't get the "reply list" option in the first place. In the basic reply-to case, the mailer *should* -- as defined by

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 03:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Its worse than that: what about people who intentionally set the Reply To header on non-mailing list emails? I believe the new behavior is only triggered when the Reply-To: and List-Post: headers match. I guess that might be a problem if the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:41:28AM -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 01/22/2018 11:20 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > > > > So, I think Thunderbird's new default is going to cause messages to go > > back to the author, ignoring the Reply-To. > > That's correct. > > > I can see how this

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 12:10 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > > Wow.  How could the Thunderbird developers even fathom to introduce an > RFC compliant dictated behavior /without/ giving an option to revert. There is a long history behind this and I agree that T'bird has not always made good

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 12:41 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: That's correct. *chuckle* I guess this is one time when munging the From for DMARC reasons may help ensure that messages do go back to the list. The T'bird developers view is that in these cases, you are offered a "Reply List" button and

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 11:20 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > > So, I think Thunderbird's new default is going to cause messages to go > back to the author, ignoring the Reply-To. That's correct. > I can see how this could be annoying as a message author who wants > messages to be directed

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 12:17 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: My bad. I was confused. In my answer above, "False" should be "True" and vice versa. ;-) -- Grant. . . . unix || die -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 10:37 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: With the default mail.override_list_reply_to = False, for a message with a List-Post: header and with the list posting address also in a Reply-To: header, T'bird will ignore the Reply-To: header and address a "Reply" to the From: address. Setting

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 10:58 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > On 01/22/2018 10:37 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: >> With the default mail.override_list_reply_to = False, for a message >> with a List-Post: header and with the list posting address also in a >> Reply-To: header, T'bird will ignore the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 22/01/18 18:24, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: Will someone please enlighten me on how mail.override_list_reply_to behaves when set to true (the default) vs false? If set to TRUE (the default value) replies will go directly to the sender of the message. If set to FALSE, replies

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 10:37 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: With the default mail.override_list_reply_to = False, for a message with a List-Post: header and with the list posting address also in a Reply-To: header, T'bird will ignore the Reply-To: header and address a "Reply" to the From: address. Setting

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 09:24 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > > Will someone please enlighten me on how mail.override_list_reply_to > behaves when set to true (the default) vs false? With the default mail.override_list_reply_to = False, for a message with a List-Post: header and with the list

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/20/2018 12:05 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: What actually happens with "reply" depends on a few things. If the mail client involved is Thunderbird, it doesn't behave as expected. See . In short, in recent T'bird if the message has a

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/22/2018 04:01 AM, Hal via Mailman-Users wrote: > > Apart from Thunderbird, are there other email apps which cause this issue? Thunderbird is the only MUA I'm aware of that does this. Their theory is since they offer a "Reply List" button, if you "Reply" you must want to reply to the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 20/01/18 20:05, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 01/20/2018 10:18 AM, Hal via Mailman-Users wrote: I'm a little confused about the "reply-to" setting as I was pretty sure I had set my list up so that all replies by default go back to the list, but for some reason a reply goes directly to the sender.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

On 01/20/2018 10:18 AM, Hal via Mailman-Users wrote: > I'm a little confused about the "reply-to" setting as I was pretty sure > I had set my list up so that all replies by default go back to the list, > but for some reason a reply goes directly to the sender. If you set "reply_goes_to_list" to

[Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

I'm a little confused about the "reply-to" setting as I was pretty sure I had set my list up so that all replies by default go back to the list, but for some reason a reply goes directly to the sender. I had "reply_goes_to_list" set to "this list" along with the list's posting address set for