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

Re: Mailing lsit code of conduct, again



On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 03:30:47PM +0000, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 01:26:29 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> 
> > Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> writes:
> > 
> > > Another solution  on your  side is to  use Mail-Followup-To.
> > > [...]
> > > Most mailers comply with this header.
> > 
> > That field is non-standard, and there are many MUAs that don't obey
> > it. It's not much of a solution if I can't expect it to be applied
> > consistently.
> 
> And many MUAs obey it.  So adding it has upsides (you will get less
> CCs), and no downsides.  Sounds like a win to me.

<sarcasm>
  Oh noes, this isn't the full proper way to do it, so rather do nothing
  than fixing it for half of the subscribers !
</sarcasm>

  I don't get why we're even discussing it again. I've not seen MJR post
here yet, to explain the evilness of MFT. Once he hace, we can let this
subpart of the thread rot in piece.

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpj7LOt9gdf0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: