Re: Decentralized reliable instant messaging?
On Wed 31 Aug 2016 at 00:34:47 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Tue 30 Aug 2016 at 17:22:34 -0500, David Wright wrote:
>
> > On Tue 30 Aug 2016 at 20:26:45 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > > On Tue 30 Aug 2016 at 19:31:08 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just out of interest, why have you sent a personal copy of a reply to the
> > > > Debian list about an email of David Wright's to me, which is an irrelevant
> > > > flouting of the code of conduct rules??? ;-) It's not like you Brian to make
> > > > Human Errors. ;-)
> > >
> > > So I did. Apologies.
> > >
> > > I make errors all the time; I just fight a good rearguard action. :) But
> > > not this time; surrender is the honorable course of action.
> > >
> > > 2016-08-30 18:45:35 1ben6M-0008JJ-JK => lisi.reisz@gmail.com R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp H=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com [64.233.167.26] X=TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128 DN="C=US,ST=California,L=Mountain View,O=Google Inc,CN=mx.google.com" C="250 2.0.0 OK 1472579135 u10si39132321wje.183 - gsmtp"
> > > 2016-08-30 18:45:50 1ben6M-0008JJ-JK => debian-user@lists.debian.org R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp H=bendel.debian.org [82.195.75.100] X=TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128 DN="C=NA,ST=NA,L=Ankh Morpork,O=Debian SMTP,OU=Debian SMTP CA,CN=bendel.debian.org,EMAIL=hostmaster@bendel.debian.org" C="250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 147DD63"
> > > 2016-08-30 18:45:50 1ben6M-0008JJ-JK Completed
> > >
> > > I must have hit "r" or "g" in mutt. Damn these two bottles of wine. :)
> >
> > The error might have been mine. I think I CC'd Lisi in error.
> > The other list I'm on expects people to group-reply.
> > I forgot myself. Sorry if I caused confusion by appearing
> > to send a personal email when it was public (if this is all
> > about <[🔎] 20160830161810.GA8604@alum>).
>
> The cavalry arrives - but hours late :); I should have stuck to my
> rearguard policy. But thanks for the intervention. It turns out I did
> hit "L" and not "r" or "g".
>
> Additionally, I have learned a little more about mutt's behaviour.
>
> <list-reply> (default: L)
>
> Reply to the current or tagged message(s) by extracting any addresses which
> match the regular expressions given by the lists or subscribe commands, but
> also honor any Mail-Followup-To header(s) if the $honor_followup_to
> configuration variable is set. In addition, the List-Post header field is
> examined for mailto: URLs specifying a mailing list address. Using this
> when replying to messages posted to mailing lists helps avoid duplicate
> copies being sent to the author of the message you are replying to.
>
> Your mail had a Mail-Followup-To header to debian-user and Lisi Reisz. I
> think it was this rather than the Cc that got me a telling off.
You got there a lot faster than I did. Presumably you don't/didn't
have any special treatment of followup_to and honor_followup_to in
your .muttrc file.
It would appear to me that it's only polite for someone to add their
*own* address to any Mail-Followup-To header (apart from list addresses
of course) so that they receive replies-to-replies (which a simple
Reply-To header wouldn't achieve).
Otherwise it acts a bit like an email-bomb, doesn't it?
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: