[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Duplicate messages on this list

On Dec  9, 1997, at 00:59, Carl Mummert wrote:
 > Assuming no Sender line, or Sender = From,  I beleive that the following 
 > mapping is compliant with the standard:
 > >From -> Sender  (Sender is omitted if 
 > 		it is the same as From, 
 >                 but it's not, anymore)
 > Reply-To -> From (So From, as the rfc wants, shows the
 >                  which machine the message came from)
 > Reply-To: debian-foo@...
 > In other words, 
 > ( reply-to == "debain-foo..." ? noop : 
 >     (From == Sender || Sender == "") ? 
 >       Sender = from, from = reply-to, 
 >       reply-to = debain-foo :
 >         x-old-sender = sender, sender = from, 
 >         from = reply-to, reply-to = debain-foo )
 > Now, the questions are,  Can we do this? and Do we want to do this?

And the answers are (to me, at least): YES and YESSSSS!!!

I'm pretty sure procmail can handle this remapping. Otherwise,
sendmail should be up to the task. As others have pointed (even those
who are against setting the Reply-To header to point to the list),
this preserves all the original information and allows those who MUST
set Reply-To to something (i.e. those behind brain-dead firewalls) to
still set it to their advantage.

So, who do I pester now with the request to do this? Who is the list

 > Carl Mummert

Gonzalo Diethelm # Windows 95: n. 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for
gonzo@ing.puc.cl # a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally 
 =Debian Linux=  # coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit 
 www.debian.org  # company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition.

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: