You replied on list, so I will too... but I will not respond to further
arguments about it, since neither of us are likely to change our mind.
On 6/19/2008, Brad Knowles ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Whats the big deal anyway? If you want lists configured to reply to
the list, just set it that way. What difference does it make what the
>> default is?
The point is that there are lots of MUAs out there that are broken,
I didn't intend to open up this debate, because I *have* read - and
*understand* the arguments on both sides. *Ideally*, I agree with you
and the Mailman devs... *realistically*, though, most discussion lists -
for most people, using the most popular mail clients - operate much more
smoothly when Reply-to munging is implemented.
*My* point was simply pointing out that there *is a preference setting*
in the Mailman GUI for changing this, so if someone *wants* to change
it, they obviously *can* - so what difference does the *default* make?
> and if you screw with the Reply-To: header, they are completely and
> totally unable to change who the reply is sent to.
Sorry, but this isn't true for any mail client I've ever used... ever
heard of copy/cut/paste? Yeah, it requires some manual labor, rather
than clicking a button, but it can still be done.
In fact, I must do this a little of this when participating *on this
list*. First, I have to hit 'Reply All' to get the list address in the
CC field, then I change the 'CC' to 'To', then *delete* the *posters*
email address so that they don't get a duplicate - which, by the way, I
notice you don't have the courtesy to do.
I wouldn't have to do any of that, if the Reply-to was set to the list.
But without being specific - like, what specific MUA's have this problem
- its kind of hard to argue.
This is how private information gets exposed on public lists, with
consequences ranging from just being personally embarassing, to
getting you fired,
If someone is dumb enough to send information of such a nature without
actually *looking* at where it is going, then yeah, they might actually
be required to pay the consequences...
to actually being life-threatening in some cases.
Do you really want to be responsible for something that could get
> someone killed?
Lol! Thanks, I needed that...
Until the vast majority of the most popular mail clients have a
>> proper 'Reply-To-List' function (TBird doesn't, although it has an
>> extension that tries to do it, it isn't very good at it) discussion
>> lists should definitely (imnsho) be configured to reply to list, and
>> I always change the ones I manage to do so.
Then you must not have read the FAQ I referenced.
I did... I just believe that it is *ideally* correct, but
*realistically* incorrect, due to the reality of limitations in both the
most popular mail clients *and* the *behavior* of most people on
discussion lists (they don't know the difference, and more importantly
*don't care*).
--
Best regards,
Charles
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Security Policy:
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
