On 18 Oct 2003 at 17:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:What do you mean with "beaten to death elsewhere" and "general feeling"?.
<knip>
[...]
The mailing list software ALREADY works according to RFC 822. Go back,You are right, I cited the wrong sentence, this one is better, also from RFC 822
re-read the sentence you just posted and note that the emphasis belongs
on the word "reply" not on "super-sedes" [sic].
4.4.3. REPLY-TO / RESENT-REPLY-TO
Note that debating the contents of RFC 822 is beside the point. It has been superceded by RFC 2822 and it has no such section -- the info about that field has been trimmed down substantially.
3.6.2. Originator fields
The originator fields of a message consist of the from field, the
sender field (when applicable), and optionally the reply-to field.
... an optional
reply-to field MAY also be included, which contains the field name
"Reply-To" and a comma-separated list of one or more addresses.
[...]
The originator fields also provide the information required when
replying to a message. When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it
indicates the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests
that replies be sent. In the absence of the "Reply-To:" field, replies
SHOULD by default be sent to the mailbox(es) specified in the "From:"
field unless otherwise specified by the person composing the reply.
Note two things: first the verbiage about the 'teleconferencing' stuff has been removed [NB: I don't believe this is just an oversight, but rather because of a general feeling that "reply-to-list" is not such a good thing, as has been beaten to death here and elsewhere]. Second, in the use of reply-to the operative verb is "suggests", which clearly implies that mail clients that permit reply-addressing options *beyond* just "send it where the reply-to says" are proper and expected.
/Bernie\
Every list to which I am subscribed uses the "reply-to"header to mark the address of the list.
Every MUA I use, which are Mozilla, Mutt, Pegasus offer the reply-to address as first choice to send a reply to.
And as you state yourself, RFC 2822 explicitely allows the use of the reply-to header.
I really do not understand why sqlite should act different than all mailinglists I get mail from. Some of them are really busy with using the right standards.
And I do not see the problem, if the reply-to header is used, all other headers can stay the same, but many people are helped with this.
kind regards Bert Verhees
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
