On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 04:54:30PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Well, what I'd prefer is that people all followed of the following:
Yes, because clearly you're in the right, and it's the people who don't
want to be Cc'ed that're making the special request.
Unfortunately, that's _not_ the case. The Debian list policy has _always_
been that you don't Cc people to mailing list posts. The developers-reference,
you know, the second thing listed on http://nm.debian.org/newnm.php as part
of the "Have you read the relevant documentation", isn't particularly subtle
or confusing:
] When replying to messages on the mailing list, please do not send a
] carbon copy (`CC') to the original poster unless they explicitly
] request to be copied. Anyone who posts to a mailing list should read
] it to see the responses.
People add the header as a matter of courtesy because it makes it easier
for some people to comply with list policy, not because it's anything out of
the ordinary.
> 1) If you want to use a nonstandard header and demand that other
> Debian users observe it, then you should take the onus on yourself
> of implementing the header in the various supported Debian MUAs.
How about you just respect the policy that's been in place on Debian lists
since well before you joined?
> 2) If you want to use a nonstandard header, and people don't follow
> it, you don't get upset and shout at them, but rather, file a bug
> report against the Debian package for the MUA they are using.
How about when you find your MUA doesn't do something you want it to, _you_
file the bug report?
> 3) If someone does something that bothers you by not observing a
> non-standard email header, you find a way of asking them to change
> their behavior which:
> a) Demonstrates respect, and
> b) Shows an understanding that it is you who are using the
> non-standard header; that it is you who are (thus) violating the
> standard, and not them, and
> c) Suggests a way they could adapt their MUA to conform to the
> non-standard header you are promoting, and
> d) Doesn't make you look like a Craig Sanders clone.
How about when you find out you're not following mailing list policy,
you either configure your mailer so it behaves correctly, get a new one,
or work around it? Everyone else who's used GNUS on Debian mailing lists
before Mail-Followup-To was invented seems to have been able to cope
with this.
According to http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html mutt >= 0.89, nmh >= 0.24
and Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnu v0.01) all support M-F-T.
> Indeed, if everyone who bitched and moaned about this or that person
> not obeying this or that non-standard header would instead just follow
> number (1) above, the problem would evaporate.
Take some responsibility. It's your mailer. It's you that's violating
list policy. It's your problem. It's you that has to fix it.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
The daffodils are coming. Are you?
linux.conf.au, February 2002, Brisbane, Australia
--- http://linux.conf.au/
Attachment:
pgpA3hz5kYBrt.pgp
Description: PGP signature