Re: Duplicate messages on this list
>>"Kai" == Kai Henningsen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Kai> email@example.com (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 06.12.97 in
>> If I set a reply-to address for the list manually, then having it
>> munged is not just being less pleasing, it is *broken*
>> behaviour. Why should we break perfectly standard mail processing
>> because some mailers are broken out there?
Kai> No such thing. It is pretty clear to me (after the discussion on
Kai> DRUMS) that there currently is no "perfectly standard" Reply-To:
Kai> processing; the header is used in too many incompatible ways.
Umm, can it be that there is no "perfectly standard" Reply-To:
processing simply because too many lists stomped right over the RFC
822's first two examples of reply-to usage (namely, for the author to
send mail elsewhare)? I'll re-read the RFC's in question (because of
my disk crash, I have lost my mirror), but I have yet to read
anything to convince me to break reply-to's by munging them.
Kai> There are _no_ universally accepted, useful conventions for
Kai> Reply-To:. Sad but true. 822 was too imprecise in it's
Kai> definition, plus current mailing lists were unknown back then.
From the quote on this mailing list, I think 822 was precise
enough; but I am no expert.
Kai> If you can't get your mailer to reply to From: when you want to,
Kai> complain to it's programmer - it's broken.
I thought that is the author sets reply-to, then that should
be used for replies, and not from. I can reply to from: unless there
is a reply-to, when that takes precedence. If people munge reply-to,
I'll never knoe, will I?
Kai> (As to "From: is broken", Reply-To: was _never_ meant to fix
Kai> that. From: _should_ be settable by the mail sender - read 822 if
Kai> you don't believe me. Mailers (or system setups) that don't allow
Kai> you to do that are _clearly_ broken. From: is not, and never has
Kai> been, meant for any sort of authentication info.)
Correct, but if the author chooses to use reply-to, in
accordance with rfc 822, it should be respected. (ours not to
question the wisdom of the author)
>> electronic mail standards and convention, is none of our
>> business. We *shoul* *not* break it.
Kai> Sorry. No can do. You will always break it for someone.
I have no qualms about breaking it for people who are not
coforming to standards.
>> I think people should get decent mail user agents.
Kai> There don't seem to be many that match your definition of
Kai> "decent". (Incidentally, that's part of why I'm still thinking
Kai> about writing my own.)
But there are some.
The magician is seated in his high chair and looks upon the world
with favor. He is at the height of his powers. If he closes his
eyes, he causes the world to disappear. If he opens his eyes, he
causes the world to come back. If there is harmony within him, the
world is harmonious. If rage shatters his inner harmony, the unity
of the world is shattered. If desire arises within him, he utters
the magic syllables that causes the desired object to appear. His
wishes, his thoughts, his gestures, his noises command the
universe. Selma Fraiberg, _The Magic Years_, pg. 107
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .