[ mailman-Patches-1906479 ] Add option for only munging Reply-To if it is not there

SourceForge.net noreply at sourceforge.net
Mon Mar 3 21:37:25 CET 2008


Patches item #1906479, was opened at 2008-03-03 11:45
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300103&aid=1906479&group_id=103

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: mail delivery
Group: Mailman 2.1
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Knut Auvor Grythe (auvor)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Add option for only munging Reply-To if it is not there

Initial Comment:
As I know a lot of you developers agree, Reply-To: header munging is not very nice. However, it appears to be a necessary evil sometimes.

My biggest problem with Reply-To: header munging is that there is no way for a poster to direct replies off-list. Any attempt to do so will fail completely because MUAs obey the Reply-To: header, and the users don't notice. Ironically, these users are often the ones who made the munging necessary in the first place.

However, I believe there is a solution to this problem. How about only adding a Reply-To: header only if one did not previously exist? This way, headers will be munged in the normal case, but if someone adds their own Reply-To: header for some reason, their value will be kept. Naturally, this behaviour should be optional, since it alters the behaviour of the lists.

I have attached a patch which enables this functionality. The patch is against 2.1.9, but seems to apply on 2.1.10b1 without complaining.

PS: This patch slightly changes the order in which munging is done, causing mlist.reply_to_address to be appended instead of prepended to the original Reply-To: header. I didn't consider this a problem, as it makes the behaviour if "This list" and "Explicit address" consistent. I also feel it made the code more straight-forward to read.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2008-03-03 12:37

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO

Consider that user at example.com configures her MUA to add a Reply-To:
user at example.com because when configuring the MUA, she was asked where
replies should be sent and didn't realize this was optional or for whatever
reason answered user at example.com.

Consider that userb at example.com sets all his MUAs to generate Reply-To:
userb at example.net because thats where he wants to read his mail regardless
of where the original was sent from.

How does your patch distinguish these cases from the one where the poster
sets an explicit Reply-To: for this message only?

The whole idea of reply-to munging is the notion that the list knows
better than the poster where replies should go. If you want the poster to
be able to determine this, don't mung the reply-to.

-1



----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300103&aid=1906479&group_id=103


More information about the Mailman-coders mailing list