Why does Mailman delete post recipients from Cc: header?
In response to a question on mailman-users, I looked at AvoidDups.py, and I see that if an address is in the Cc: header of a post and is a candidate recipient and is a list member with DontReceiveDupes set, the address is removed from the recipient list and from the Cc: header of the post.
I understand why it is removed from the recipient list - that's the whole point - but does anyone know/remember why it is also removed from the Cc: header? This seems unnecessary and inconsistent since it isn't removed from To:, Resent-To: or Resent-Cc:.
Also, there is a docstring in the module that refers to an in memory Message-Id: list for avoiding cross-posted dups which I think was in the original patch, but was never incorporated. Perhaps this should be rewritten.
-- Mark Sapiro <msapiro@value.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mark Sapiro wrote:
I understand why it is removed from the recipient list - that's the whole point - but does anyone know/remember why it is also removed from the Cc: header? This seems unnecessary and inconsistent since it isn't removed from To:, Resent-To: or Resent-Cc:.
I looked at the subversion (from cvs) log messages and found from Barry:
process(): If a member has enabled their DontReceiveDuplicates option, we'll also strip their addresses from CC headers in the list copy. This helps keep the CC lines from growing astronomically.
I guess that answers the 'why'. Should we try to address the inconsistency?
-- Mark Sapiro <msapiro@value.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 09:12 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
Mark Sapiro wrote:
I understand why it is removed from the recipient list - that's the whole point - but does anyone know/remember why it is also removed from the Cc: header? This seems unnecessary and inconsistent since it isn't removed from To:, Resent-To: or Resent-Cc:.
I looked at the subversion (from cvs) log messages and found from Barry:
process(): If a member has enabled their DontReceiveDuplicates option, we'll also strip their addresses from CC headers in the list copy. This helps keep the CC lines from growing astronomically.
I guess that answers the 'why'. Should we try to address the inconsistency?
We can, although I think in practice it doesn't come up often. I have seen long CC headers but usually the Resents, and even the To header don't get insanely long. But consistency would be good here I think!
-Barry
participants (2)
-
Barry Warsaw -
Mark Sapiro