On 2015-03-03 12:42 AM, Darren Duncan wrote: > I think that what needs to be done is for each foo at sqlite.org to > return an error/undeliverable message if someone sends a message to > it, citing that all messages must be explicitly sent to the > corresponding foo at mailinglists.sqlite.org. That should handily solve > the problem. -- Darren Duncan
I see where you are coming from, but if the Reply-To field contains 2 email addresses and then the server penalizes you for using one of them, that might go down in history as the most-evil mailing-list quirk of all time. As to Mike's post - the dual mailing-list's reason for being is very clear and welcomed, no qualms there, just the Reply-to duplication that is quirky. I read all forum emails, I do not recall any multi-person decision to add this dual Reply-To thing, however memory is not my strength so I'm happy with the explanation - but I am wondering - is this done and dusted? Is there any chance we might re-open the discussion now that real-World scenarios have set in? It's an extremely minor irritation and will cause a few extra mail-traffic items at its worst - the only real casualty being my OCD, but I can't help thinking there is not a single good reason to keep the situation (unless someone can show the opposite). > > On 2015-03-02 10:37 AM, Mike Owens wrote: >> For what it is worth, the move to mailinglists.sqlite.org is a result of >> the Mailman web interface having to be hosted under the following two >> constraints: >> >> 1. It must be on port 80 >> 2. It cannot be on sqlite.org port 80 >> >> I explained this reasoning in a previous email. The short version is >> because we are using two web servers on the VM that hosts both the >> sqlite.org website and fossil repos (althttpd) and the Mailman web >> interface (Apache). We previously did this on a single IP where >> mailman was >> on port 8080. However, we had a significant number of complaints from >> people who could not reach the Mailman web interface via sqlite.org:8080 >> due to firewall restrictions in their respective locations. So we did >> what >> we could to move it to port 80. >> >> So to satisfy these two constraints, mailinglists.sqlite.org was born. >> Unless somebody else knows better, Mailman does not allow one to use two >> domains for a given list. Either something will screw up with the mail >> routing or in the web interface if you try to use more than one. You >> have >> to pick one domain and stick with it. Thus I could not continue to >> support >> both the previous sqlite.org (:8080) domain and the new >> mailinglists.sqlite.org (:80) for the users list. So I made the move >> from >> the one to the other. >> >> Regarding the reply-to policy. I honestly don't remember the reasoning >> behind it. I know there was a big long discussion about it in the past >> (search the list) and after the dust settled we chose the current policy >> and that is the way it is configured today. I do believe the policy >> was a >> result of the consensus of the mailing list users. I can say that we do >> everything we can to make most of the people happy most of the time. >> That >> is the very reason we made this change to begin with -- to make it >> possible >> for everyone to use the list. It would have been easier to just keep >> things >> the same and let the people who can't reach port 8080 deal with it, >> but we >> did what we had to to make it accessible for them as well. There are >> a lot >> of variables in the system and we juggle them as best we can. >> >> Any feedback or suggestions are always welcome. >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:18 AM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 12:45 +0200, R.Smith wrote: >>>> Ok, I've found the source of the list duplications. >>>> >>>> Some emails (Such as the one by J.K. Lowden 2-March-2015 re: >>>> Characters >>>> corrupt after importing...) contains a "Reply-To" field in the header >>>> with both list addresses which must have sneaked in there due to some >>>> automatic list feature. (By "Both" I mean the old: >>>> sqlite-users at sqlite.org and the new: >>> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org) >>> >>> You don't need that, do you? Just hitting Reply All to a message which >>> is: >>> To: sqlite-users at sqlite.org >>> Reply-To: sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org >>> >>> would generate a message which ends up going to both, wouldn't it? >>> >>> (I can't easily test; I've configured my mailer to ignore abusive >>> Reply-To: headers from mailing lists where it can detect them, so my >>> Reply and Reply All buttons actually do what I *ask* them to.) >>> >>> But looking at the first message in the 'PhD Student' thread, it >>> appears >>> just as in my example above. And John KcKown's response of 26 Feb 2015 >>> 07:16:47 -0600 is indeed to both addresses, as if he'd done the correct >>> thing and simply hit 'Reply All'. >>> >>>> I usually use the "Reply to List" button (Thunderbird) which replies >>>> correctly, >>> >>> Note that that is considered extremely anti-social in many cases, >>> because it cuts some people out of discussions entirely. See >>> http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html for a full discussion. >>> >>> -- >>> dwmw2 > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
