Re: ignoring the CoC in regards to cc:s (Re: Can we ship sources of a PDF file in the Debian diff?
Noah Slater <email@example.com> writes:
> As far as I see it:
> * Debian has dropped the Reply-To header because it is "harmful" in
> some way.
> * Debian has mandated that all replies must behave as if Reply-To existed.
If this were the case, this would be an easy solution. However, it's
not. Debian has mandated that all *public* replies must behave as if
Reply-To existed, but all *private* replies behave as if it did not, and
repliers must distinguish between the two.
Simplifications that drop that distinction will always miss the point.
The primary problem with setting Reply-To is that it makes private
replies extremely difficult (in clients that honor the RFC-defined
meaning of the header field, at least) and significantly increases the
chances that private replies will accidentally become public. I don't
think that's the right social direction in which to go.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>