On 03/22/2013 09:41 PM, Michael Heydekamp wrote: >> It's not so simple. What if it isn't a mailing list post. If sender sets >> Reply-To. So, Reply-To and From are different. I think that sender >> intention is clear to not send a reply to both of these addresses. No? > > Sure. And if I would want to follow that intention, I'd use the standard > reply button. > > But if I use the "Reply all" option of the Reply-all button, I don't care > about the user's (or the list's) intention, but I do care about my own > intention. That's what this option is meant for and what the difference to > the function of the standard reply button is. It is ME who wants to reply to > all, not the sender. RC currently tries to prevent me from doing that.
No, A difference between is in possibility to send a reply to Cc and To addresses of the original message. Not in the Reply-To header handling. >>> BTW: Is "Sender:" being respected in RC at all...? >> >> As a source for reply recipients, no. > > Should be added, IMO. It's a standardized RFC header. But, that's another story. Create a ticket. >>>> I prefer current solution (1). Because I think that if Reply-To is >>>> defined a senders intention is to not receive replies to his From: >>>> address, no matter if Reply, Reply-All or Reply-List is used. >>> >>> In the case of this list for instance, there is no such "senders intention", >>> as the Reply-To: header has been set by the list rather than by the sender, >>> right? >> >> So, it's a list intention, doesn't matter. > > It does. Because the list's intention may contradict the sender's intention. > See below. > > So whose intention should we follow...? Does not matter whose. It's specified by the message headers. >>> If I want to make sure to get a reply to one of my list posts to my sender >>> address AND to the list - is there a way at all to set an appropriate >>> Reply-To: header, which will not be changed by Mailman? >> >> I don't know, maybe with Mail-Reply-To set to your address. > > How can I set Mail-Reply-To: with Roundcube just for a particular message?? If you set Reply-To, Roundcube will set Mail-Reply-To automatically to the same address. > So, at the start of this poll, you claimed that Reply-To: (i.e. the sender's > intention) should be respected no matter what, even if "Reply all" had been > chosen. > > But if a sender sets Reply-To: to his own AND a list address, the sender's > intention may be overridden by the list's intention, if expressed through a > Mail-Reply-To: header? > > Doesn't sound too logical and consistent to me. A list may always override > the sender's intention, but a respondent may not be doing the same by > chosing "Reply all"...? For me it is logical. -- Aleksander 'A.L.E.C' Machniak LAN Management System Developer [http://lms.org.pl] Roundcube Webmail Developer [http://roundcube.net] --------------------------------------------------- PGP: 19359DC1 @@ GG: 2275252 @@ WWW: http://alec.pl _______________________________________________ Roundcube Development discussion mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/dev
