On 12/3/07, James G. Sack (jim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Louden wrote:
> > We beat this to a pulp on the oclug mailing list just a few days ago.
> >
> > Basically it makes sense from any logical point of view for a mailing
> > list. Specifically that most responses generally want to reply to the
> > entire list so that an actual conversation can take place.
> >
> > However setting it to reply to list by default violates RFC 2822 apparently.
> >
> > Which is not to say your going to hell if you do. Just that you place
> > the ease of allowing members of the mailing list to simply hit reply
> > to communicate with the entire list over adhering to standards.
> >
> > Is it really an inconvenience to hit reply to all, no. However its not
> > what we normally do to emails so it seem like an inconvenience.
> >
> > Also many modern mail clients are smart and have a "reply to list"
> > option. This does not apply to those of us that use gmail sadly.
> >
> > The munging that takes place isn't really going to prevent all that
> > much spam from coming your way eventually I see no reason to use reply
> > to poster over list.
> >
> > Apparently the list moderator for OCLUG and at least one guy at UCI
> > feel that reply to poster is the way to go. I am on numerous lug
> > mailing lists and all of them except OCLUG use reply to mailing list.
> > However this could be just in based on the fact that they are LUGs and
> > not dev lists or etc.
> >
> > If you really want to understand the reasons why just wrap you brain
> > around RFC 2822 which is just a google search away.
> >
> > ...Now I'm probably going to get reamed for top posting. Which RFC is that?
> >
> Thanks Chris (and I forgive you).
>
> You know, with only a quick look at rfc 2822. I would think there might
> be an argument that the list _is_ the sender ("re-sender", maybe), and
> that there is no inconsistency in having reply-to be back to the list.
>
Here is the specific line.
RFC 2822.
"When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to
which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent."
A mailing list is not the author, and it can not change the reply-to field
without violating the email RFC.
> Different readers give different readings?
>
> Thanks again,
> ..jim ('course, maybe I read it too fast)
>
>
> --
> [email protected]
> http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
>
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
