On May 3, 2011 at 21:31 +0300, Stoyan Angelov wrote: =>On 05/03/11 18:50, Alan Coopersmith wrote: =>> On 05/ 3/11 03:11 AM, Stoyan Angelov wrote: =>> > On 05/03/11 09:36, [email protected] wrote: =>> > > I am away from the office, returning on May 04th 2011. For any urgent =>> > > requirerements, please contact [email protected]. =>> > =>> > ughh.... here we go again :( =>> =>> The Oracle vacation autoresponder doesn't do that to other mailman lists =>> I'm on - for instance, you never see them on opensolaris.org mailing lists =>> which are full of people using the Oracle e-mail system. =>> =>> The difference I see in the headers there is "Reply-To", which we know the =>> Oracle autoresponder uses since one of the internal workarounds to avoid =>> those messages is to set Reply-To to a address that sends them to /dev/null. =>> SunRay-Users sets it, but the other lists I'm on without this problem don't =>> set it. => =>when the list was created back in 2004 it was not very popular and there was a =>need to generate interest and to drive as much posts as possible to the list =>so more people would find it interesting and participate. => =>this was the simple reason the list was configured the way it is. one of the =>decisions was to configure mailman to insert a specific "Reply-To" header in =>all messages. the drawback was that this made the private replies much more =>difficult but the decision was inline with the goal - post everything to the =>list and not on private replies. => =>i see no problem in changing this configuration now (this does not make me =>like Oracle's autoresponder either). => =>if anyone else on the list has any comment about this - please post your =>opinion here. i will wait for a short time and proceed with the change that =>will reconfigure mailman to not insert a specific "Reply-To" header in the =>messages.
I very much like the replies going back to the list and vote to keep the reply-to setting. I don't think that volume on this list warrant a "SunManagers" style mailing list. If you are not into SMTP, you are free to get up and walk away as you have seen my vote. :) Otherwise, you have been warned..... :) In jest...Maybe Oracle should move to Oracle's other mail platform, Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server. (The "Comms Suite" also has calendar and IM and was what Sun employees were used to.) It follows the SMTP, IMAP, SIEVE, etc RFCs almost to a fault. But then some of the main engineers help(ed) write the RFCs. :) Here is a comment that Ned Freed wrote to the Info-iMS mailing list (user list for PMDF -> Sun -> Oracle messaging server) back on 17-Dec-2004 > Correct. The rule is fairly simple: If a message doesn't have a known > address of the user in a To:, Cc:, or Bcc: field the message is > assumed to have been forwarded or redirected by a list. Vacation > replies do not make sense in such cases. And more to the point, when > they are sent they sometimes find their way back onto the list, which > is INCREDIBLY annoying to the list membership. In some cases it can > get you banned from a list - and rightly so IMO. More seriously...Oracle has known this has a problem for at least several months. The Oracle Beehive team really should fix this issue yesterday. (Where "yesterday" gave them at least 6 months to fix it.) -- *********************************************************************** Derek Diget Office of Information Technology Western Michigan University - Kalamazoo Michigan USA - www.wmich.edu/ *********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
