[ Please don't Cc: public replies to me. ] Nathan E Norman: > If this is the case, then reading the lists with Pine is indeed a PITA! > (I know there are other alternatives to Pine, but I'm used to it and so > far too lazy to change ...) I assume you mean that it is painful to reply to list messages with Pine. I think Pine makes it fairly easy to remove and move addresses (ctrl-k removes an address, ctrl-u inserts it again). For what it's worth, I don't think Reply-to should be set by the mailing list, because its definition was botched by RFC822 (it has too many meanings). Thus, too many mail user agents (or their authors) get confused, and operate in surprising ways when Reply-to is forced by the list. For example, every self-respecting mail user agent has separate "reply to author of message" and "reply to everyone" commands. If the mail has a Reply-to header, most mail user agents will obey that automatically. Thus, it is easy to send comments meant to be private to the list. One wishes that everyone would check their To and Cc headers before sending private comments, but that's not how people work, especially since it's necessary only on a few mailing lists. Without the Reply-to, most users need to edit the To/Cc headers manually to remove non-list respondents. I consider this to be a smaller evil than sending private message to lists by mistake. The new headers will solve these problems, of course, but it will take time until they're in wide-enough use. (I don't use them myself, because my MH/exmh/procmail/other mail configuration has become complicated and fragile enough that I'm considering writing a new mailer from scratch rather than touch the config. This is not a joke.)
Attachment:
pgpmxzOguzTrQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature