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

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

[ Miles Bader writes ]
> Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> writes:
> > Which reminds me, why doesn't this list just set:
> >  reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Because it's completely wrong.
> Doing so takes the choice of who to reply to (the sender or the list)
> out of the hands of the reader [at least without annoying manual editing
> of addresses].

As opposed to the current scheme, which also requires "annoying manual
editing of addresses" to reply to the list, if your mailreader does the
reasonable thing and assumes you want to reply to the original sender of
the message, in liu of a reply-to header.

A comparison:

Your message came to me with the following headers of interest:

Sender: miles@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp
Reply-To: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
From: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
Resent-Message-ID: <Up7NEC.A.HVC.jX3U6@murphy>
Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
X-Loop: debian-devel@lists.debian.org

Whereas another mailing list I'm on, that does it more reasonably, has
the discussed

From: User Name <user@xxxxxxx.com>
Sender: owner-UUASC@uuasc.org
Reply-To: UUASC@uuasc.org

I think there are also ways to make the default reply go to the list, but
allow "reply to all" to send to the list AND the original sender, but i
dont remember the structure offhand.

Reply to: