On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:28:52AM +0100, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
> (I hope you don't mind me sending this back to the list.)
> (Funny that you top posted in reply to this mail.)
Funny, how? Only pedantic wannabe net-cops don't recognize that either
form has its place. Copying private communication back to a list, on the
other hand, is recognized as being quite rude. In any case:
> > The Reply-To: address is supposed to be used for personal responses.
> I don't know what the difference is between a personal response and an on
> list response (technically speaking that is), but many lists I am
> subscribed to do explicitely set their reply-to address to point back to
> the list, so replies are automatically send to the list instead of off
> list.
Lists that set Reply-To: are implementing a *hack*, pure and simple, that
allows most primitive email clients with newbie users 'do the right thing'.
Reply-To: is *supposed* to be a private response address if, and only if,
the From: address is not the desired contact address. For example, if a user
has three email accounts that they may send from, but prefers to receive
responses on only one of them, the user should set Reply-To: as they see fit.
> Most personal mails I receive do not have the reply-to header set, because
> they expect me to reply to their from address. You still can use reply-to
> in personal mails if you don't want people to reply to your from address.
> However, the current Fedora list setup will probably ruin that setting if
> you send a mail with a set reply-to address to the list (unless it rewrites
> it to the from address).
The current Fedora list setup is a hack, and you will find that many (or most)
mailing lists do *not* implement this hack, as it is *recognized* as being
wrong.
> > Since I don't intend a personal response, I do not respond to Reply-To:.
> My mailer replies to the from field unless the reply-to field is set.
> As said, many mailing lists are set up to let you reply to the list via
> the reply-to field. A small list:
> ...
> Looks like the question whether a reply-to setup is a good thing is
> undecided (clearly a BSD/Linux split) (I personally think it is a
> convenient setup for a mailing list, always replying to the list, but
> having the from field preserved), but although Mail-Followup-To might have
> originally be intended to be used for mailing list setups it's use is not
> widely spread. So much for the standards...
If the mailing list *truly* wished to enforce a protocol whereby it is
expected that all members respond to all other members, via *only* the
list, the *list* administrator should be forcing Mail-Followup-To: to
be set. One step further would be to *deny* emails to the list that copied
any members currently on the list. I see neither of these implemented.
> > Jeff is not correct. The exact detail he is not correct on, though, is the
> > *accepted* means of responding to a post. In fact, there is *no* consistent
> > process defined. Mail-Followup-To: was created as a means of solving this
> > problem.
> Think I answered this above. Very nice that Mail-Followup-To was created
> for this purpose in 1976, but fact of the matter is it is not widely used,
> neither on Linux nor BSD, so best thing to do is to go with the flow, which
> is to conform to the mail list's configuration. In case of the Red Hat
> lists this is to reply to the reply-to. (Don't mean to be belittling here.)
> Anyway it saves header fields:
> To: Ab <a@xxxxx>
> Copies to: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
It isn't widely used primarily because people refuse to use it. For example,
I point out yourself.
> > So few people are aware that Reply-To: is abused, and that
> > Mail-Followup-To: exist, that even people have used the Internet for
> > years don't understand
> > the point.
> Lost battle.
Only to those who give up easily...
Cheers,
mark
--
mark@xxxxxxxxx/markm@xxxxxx/markm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
