Re: Message CCs (again for the xth time)
>>>>> "Sam" == Sam Vilain <email@example.com> writes:
Sam> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 08:58:19 -0600 "Keith G. Murphy"
Sam> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> E-mails ought to have scripts, that would force the MUA's to do
>> all the right things! Well, Outlook has ones that force it to
>> do all the wrong things. ;-)
Sam> Not _force_, just present a piece of information when the
Sam> user tries to do certain things, like "The convention on this
Sam> mailing list is NOT to direct replies to the original author,
Sam> but to the mailing list. By overriding this, you are
Sam> violating local etiquette. Please consider if this is really
Sam> what you want to do." - Sam Vilain, email@example.com WWW:
Sam> http://sam.vilain.net/ GPG public key:
The one big problem with no-ccs rules in this:
How is the MUA meant to know what addresses it is meant to reply to?
Please don't just say "the mailing list address", as how is
the MUA going to know which address is the mailing list address?
Also, some replies should *not* go to the mailing list either, but to
the mailing list via a BTS address, for instance. Consider
debian-policy, where this frequently applies.
Also, what about cross posted messages? Why should the reply go to one
mailing list, but not the other? How is the MUA to know that two of
the addresses are required for mailing lists, and should both be used?
Yes, sometimes cross posts are required.
I consider this whole debate to be useless until somebody can provide
me a reasonable answer to the above.
Otherwise, the task of removing CCs must be done manually, where
mistakes can be made.
Brian May <firstname.lastname@example.org>