-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
jdow wrote:
> I'm simply trying to figure out a scenario that would result
> in Aaron sending email to Todd's don't send here address without
> Todd replying to one of Aaron's emails and then Aaron replying
> to that email.
Just to clarify, it was Tim's mailbox that is (or rather was) setup to
not accept mail. I personally don't need or want copies sent to me as
well as the list, but I'll handle that with procmail and visual
filtering on my end.
> The header markup taking place seems to require that complex a
> scenario. When Aaron gets back with us he can, perhaps, let us know
> if that's the scenario.
>
> (If not there may be something else peculiar going on.)
>
> In long form:
>
> Aaron sends a message to the list with his Reply-To:.
>
> That message acquires the FC list's dual Reply-To: feature.
>
> Todd replies to Aaron's email. It goes out to both Reply-To:
> addresses and the race is on.
Well, in my case, mutt has a nice list-reply function which I use so
when I reply, the message goes only to the list even when the Reply-to
header has multiple addresses -- except for the times I manually muck
it up and accidentally send it to the original sender.
(And yeah, I know that may not be what the sender wants, but that's
not my concern. I read from the list and I reply to the list. If I
notice someone has asked in the message body to be Cc'd, I may try to
oblige, but it's just dumb luck if I remember to do that instead of
using reply as I normally do.)
But s/Todd/Tim/ and that's about how things would work so far. :)
> The direct email comes first without the FC4 Reply-To: header.
>
> The reflected email comes in a little later with the FC4 Reply-To:
> header.
>
> Aaron's mailer MAY delete the second reception as a duplicate
> message. Or it may be in his mailbox after the one that came
> direct.
One should be in the inbox and another should be in the fedora list
mailbox. Who reads a list that produces over 1000 messages / week and
doesn't filter it automatically? ;-)
> Either way Aaron replies to the direct message with no Reply-To: and
> gets rebuffed automatically.
>
> This leads to Aaron getting frustrated and angry.
>
> So that's the long form of what seems to be happening. If there is a
> shorter way I'd like to know.
I think another way would be if Aaron figured that since Tim sent him
a reply to his personal address, that maybe Tim would like one in
return and so he used reply-all to reply to a list message from Tim.
I don't see anything broken in anyone's setup or in the list's. The
only possible thing broken is the principal of least astonishment due
to the relatively small number of lists that behave as this list does
in adding to the reply-to without overwriting it. But that's
reasonable behavior I think, just not all that common (to me anyway).
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you.
-- C. G. Jung (1875-1961)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkSiAM4mGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1qZMwCg7Fzz5NC0gzLYIz6PyG9R7XDvK7AAoJh3Sm1a
Q8IYyEGgbJXKxMnQpcWB
=w/nI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
