On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Felipe Contreras >> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> The problem is not in the system. >> >> The sender has to realise that he/she has sent a private email! LOL > > Yeah, so? It's a user mistake, it's up to the user how to deal with it. One of the roles of an administrator is to help users... >> It is much less problematic for "reply" to reply to the list, >> especially if changing that behavior is solely meant to help those who >> don't want to subscribe to it... > > No, as I said before, the Reply-To problem is *orthogonal*. > > See, I'm _subscribed_, right? > > When I search for 'list:users.lists.fedoraproject.org > to:felipe.contreras' I don't find anything (well, I actually I see one > mail because Alan Cox ignored the Reply-To header). > > OTOH 'list:linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org to:felipe.contreras' works fine. > > Also, what happens if I choose to stay subscribed, but decide to turn > mail delivery off? Well, I can send mails, but I will not get the > replies. > > So no, the drawbacks of Reply-To munging are not limited to non-subscribers. If you subscribe to a list but opt not to receive emails from that list, you are not a member of that list's community and your desires and needs should not be catered to. To go back to debian-user, it is set up the way that you would like for the only reason that I consider acceptable (even though I disagree with it) and that is that messages that are intended to be private are not sent to the entire list (admins helping users?). >>>> 2. Many people hit "reply all" and the person they are replying to >>>> complains that he/she has received two emails. >>> >>> That's because either they are stupid or their system is stupid, and >>> their MUA is not right. >>> >>> In Feodra's case mailman is used, which has the option: >>> "Avoid duplicate copies of messages?" >> >> When someone sends an email to a person and to debian-user and that >> person is subscribed to debian-user, two emails are received, one of >> which does not go through the list server so its settings don't come >> into play. > > And that's the only mail the person will receive. The list server will > see, oh, that mail was sent directly, so I'm not going to do it again. > > Did you even read the description? > --- > Avoid duplicate copies of messages? > When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list > message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the mailing > list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the mailing list; > select No to receive copies. > > If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you elect to > receive copies, every copy will have a X-Mailman-Copy: yes header > added to it. >>> You seem to have it on by default. Problem solved. >> >> I think that you mean "the people who complain have it on by default" >> because I have never received duplicate emails, nor complained about >> them. > > No, the people who complain (if the ml uses mailman (not everyone > does)) have it *off*. > > Fedora mailing lists (or at lest this one) has it on by default; > that's why you would not see this problem (in case somebody overrides > the Reply-To header). My bad. I hadn't considered the possibility that the ml app would/could be smart enough to check the to: and cc: fields... -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
