Muhahaha. 20 years of mailing llists and still the same discussions wrt reply-to.
Top-posting intended :-) SCNR Jan -- Jan H Wildeboer | EMEA Open Source Affairs | Office: +49 (0)89 205071-207 Red Hat GmbH | Mobile: +49 (0)174 33 23 249 Technopark II, Haus C | Fax: +49 (0)89 205071-111 Werner-von-Siemens-Ring 11 -15 | 85630 Grasbrunn | _____________________________________________________________________ Reg. Adresse: Red Hat GmbH, Technopark II, Haus C, Werner-von-Siemens-Ring 11 -15 85630 Grasbrunn, Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 153243 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Brendan Lane, Charlie Peters, Michael Cunningham, Charles Cachera _____________________________________________________________________ GPG Key: 3AC3C8AB Fingerprint: 3D1E C4E0 DD67 E16D E47A 9564 A72F 5C39 3AC3 C8AB ----- Original Message ----- From: tos-boun...@teachingopensource.org <tos-boun...@teachingopensource.org> To: t...@ash.osuosl.org <t...@ash.osuosl.org> Cc: tos@teachingopensource.org <tos@teachingopensource.org> Sent: Sat Jul 02 12:50:41 2011 Subject: Re: [TOS] Fwd: teachingopensource.org mailing list membershipsremindertosmaillist.neophyte_...@ordinaryamerican.net > 2) What is the policy about replies? > > Sorry, but I don't like having to remember to change every address in > every reply I make. [...] In my opinion, Reply-To should not be set. There is a perfectly good "List-Post" header telling mail clients where to send list-replies. (IETF RFC-2369 I think.) Consider the potential damage: With Reply-To: A1. Reply-To set, mail client supports List-Post => list-reply command works but reply command is broken and does the same as list-reply, no way to recover off-list reply command except manual editing, risks private messages going to list. A2. Reply-To set, mail client ignores List-Post => reply goes to list, no way to recover off-list reply command except manual editing. Without: B1. No Reply-To, mail client supports List-Post => list-reply command works, reply command works. B2. No Reply-To, mail client ignores List-Post => reply goes direct, user of incomplete client has to use Reply-All or edit the recipients, risks list messages going privately. Why should users be punished for having List-Post-supporting clients by risking private messages going public if they overlook the break, just so users of worse clients don't risk public messages going private? If a mail client doesn't support List-Post properly, report the bug - and fix it if you can (it's free and open source software, right?) Hope that informs, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. Webmaster, Debian Developer, Past Koha RM, statistician, former lecturer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for various work through http://www.software.coop/ _______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://lists.teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos _______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://lists.teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
