[Mailman-Developers] Re: [Mailman-CVS] CVS: 'mailman/modules mm_digest.py'

[Barry A. Warsaw]

[Ken, I hope you don't mind me changing the follow up to the
developers list.  Folks, this thread started in response to a checkin
that strips certain headers... -BAW]

>>>>> "KM" == Ken Manheimer <klm@cnri.reston.va.us> writes:

    >> Digest messages now keep all headers except 'received',
    >> 'errors-to', and all 'x-*' ones (and any continuations of
    >> these).
    >>  should x-* headers be stripped?  the user can use them to add
    >> interesting tidbits that probably ought to be preserved.  what
    >> is the rationale as to which headers get stripped and which
    >> remain?

    KM> If you take a look at a non-mime digest (or a mime digest in a
    KM> reader that doesn't minimize the headers to just essential
    KM> ones) you'll see that it doesn't take much to have the headers
    KM> outweigh, and obscure, the messages.  My sense is that
    KM> sticking to official headers - and not all of them at that -
    KM> is all that can be justified.  The default settings for most
    KM> mail readers, minimizing out even things like organization and
    KM> sender, gives credence to this view.  And people reading the
    KM> non-mime digests don't have the option of mimimizing the
    KM> headers display...

In general, I like a policy kind of like the Hippocratic oath of
mailers, "above all do minimal munging".  I agree with you that
headers may end up outweighing content in RFC934 digests, so there has
to be tradeoffs.  I personally don't much like digest mailing lists,
so maybe I'm not the right person to say, but I also am a little
uncomfortable that digest subscribers get a different message than
non-digest subscribers.  My mental model is that the digest is just
the sum of all the message a non-digest subscriber would see, packaged
conveniently, and sent out less frequently.  If I were to view a MIME
digest in a MIME savvy MUA (e.g. VM/XEmacs), I could unpack the digest
and view the individual articles, and it would look no different than
if I was a non-digest reader.

Perhaps this can't be acheived in practice, and maybe it really does
make sense to strip or change some headers.  But I guess I don't like
the idea of stripping out headers that users take special pains to
craft, like Reply-to and most X-* headers (and not just 'cause I like
the ones I add).  I don't care if most MUA hide this stuff.  Those
headers can be useful!  I know that VM's author (Kyle Jones) takes
special care to include as many headers as possible when creating
digests, precisely because those headers are occasionally useful.

Maybe there's a distinction to be made b/w MIME and non-MIME digests?
I can see more of a rationale for stripping headers in RFC934 style
digests.

-Barry