Mailman's official policy won't change. It considers Reply-To munging to be a bad thing in the general case, and will discourage its use. It will still supply the tools to allow list owners to do it, but it may make such options more obscure. Support for Reply-To munging will not be removed if only so we can tell list owners to stfu, or to provide them cover to tell their users to stfu. :)
Mailman also recognizes that there are a few limited legitimate use cases for a mailing list to indicate where follow up postings should go, and that there is currently no other way to support these use cases than Reply-To munging.
Any attempt to impose additional semantics or responsibilities on Reply-To will only make matters worse. I support Stephen's efforts to rally consensus and eventual standards around an unambiguous less- contentious <wink> list-domain header for these use cases.
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
