Hi,
One of my users is complaining because digested messages have no
Reply-To: header. He says the behaviour changed from 2.0 to 2.1.
Is this change intentional?
More info:
- the list has reply_goes_to_list = 1
- Reply-To: is ok for non-digest members
- running 2.1b3+
--
Adde parvum parvo magnus acervus erit.
Simone Piunno, FerraraLUG - http://members.ferrara.linux.it/pioppo
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:58:26 -0400
bob <Puff@NLE" <bob(a)nleaudio.com>> wrote:
> A note / plea for those working on Pipermail archives. It would be
> really nice if Mailman would store the archives in a 8.3
> dos-compatible filename. This makes the storing of archives on CDROM
> much easier, and cross-platform friendly.
Easier to use one of the extended CDROM formats which supports long
filenames.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(a)kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:59:44 +0200
Simone Piunno <pioppo(a)ferrara.linux.it> wrote:
> One of my users is complaining because digested messages have no
> Reply-To: header. He says the behaviour changed from 2.0 to 2.1. Is
> this change intentional?
Yes. Digest messages should never be replied to. Tell the user to
burst his digests and reply to the individual messages.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(a)kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.