Reformatted excerpts from Edward Z. Yang's message of 2009-07-27: > From: corr...@example.com > To: corr...@example.com > Reply-To: corr...@example.com > List-Post: mailto:incorr...@example.com > > Sup detects List-Post, categorizes the message as a list message, and then > sets the default reply mode as list, which results in List-Post being used > as the to address.
So in this case, following reply-to is correct. > Unfortunately, mailing list administrating is notoriously broken. I'm not > sure at all what the right solution is. Take for example this other case: > > From: per...@example.com > To: l...@example.com > Reply-To: per...@example.com > List-Post: mailto:l...@example.com > > Reply-To, in this case, was set by the mailing list server. In this case, I'd argue that this means the list administrator wants the default reply behavior to be to the individual and not the list. So I'd again prefer Sup default to the reply-to address rather than the list address. (With the caveat that this is overrideable by hooks on a per-list basis, so if it's a matter of an incompetent list administrator, or simply disagreeing with them, one can override this behavior for this list.) > However, consider the next case: > > From: pers...@example.com > To: l...@example.com > Cc: m...@example.com > > Which is when someone else hit "Reply all" and you got CC'ed. This means > that the mail never passed through the mailing list agent, the > List-Post/Reply-To > headers never got set, and the only way to tell that you should reply to the > whole list is to explicitly ask for "Reply all" semantics (Sup defaults to > "Reply" semantics, which is damn confusing if you're not paying attention). There's not much to be done in this case, EXCEPT that if you receive more than one copy of the message, you should keep the list header around. Then the only time you're in a funny situation is when you've received the first but not the other. This is presumably why Mutt had you register your mailing list addresses explicitly, which I always found a little irritating. (Or to have Sup keep around email addresses known to belong to lists, and match those in the To: field against that, which seems significantly more complicated.) > The core problem is that subtle changes in state should not require the user > to do things differently; it breaks muscle memory and makes mistakes easy. I agree with this in principle, but I see addressing a message as a fundamental part of composing it. You can remove the notion of a smart default reply-to address from your Sup, if you like, by using the reply-to hook. And as for the default, I think I'm of the opinion that setting the default reply address so as to obey the reply-to is correcter than anything else (including whatever Sup does currently). -- William <wmorgan-...@masanjin.net> _______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk
