[Mailman-Users] Re: [Mailman-Developers] Announcing Mailman 2.0 release candidate 2

[Phil Barnett]

On 14 Nov 2000, at 0:16, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:

> 
> >>>>> "PB" == Phil Barnett <midnight@the-oasis.net> writes:
> 
>     PB> I upgraded from 2.0b6 from 2.0rc2 Friday night. A person wrote
>     PB> me and said the replyto: is no longer pointed to the list. I
>     PB> checked several messages and they were, but some were not. Any
>     PB> message I send to the list has a replyto of myself instead of
>     PB> to the list.
> 
> Please remember that if the original message has a Reply-To: already,
> Mailman will not overwrite that, even if "explicit reply-to" is set.
> So, did the original mesasge have a Reply-To already?
> 
> I just tested this using rc2.  With reply_goes_to_list set to
> "explicit address" and reply_to_address set to some non-blank value,
> any message without a Reply-To: gets one set to that value.  Any
> message that already has a Reply-To: set is unchanged.  That's
> expected behavior (i.e. works for me!)

Expected behavour for whom? For all the users on my lists, it has 
them screaming. They want to know why Mailman is broken after 
the upgrade.

2.0b6 did not exhibit this behaviour. How can I make 2.0rc2 work 
like b6 did?

I think it's rather impossible to get all list users on the planet to 
remove their replyto so they can reply to the list on a list that 
replyto list is set. Expecially so since setting replyto is generally a 
global setting in most MUA's.

Why was this changed? Is there a way to make Mailman to have 
this be selectable behaviour for it to work both ways?

Not being able to force replyto to the list is broken behaviour in my 
users eyes, and, they are the ones who really count. My open 
source developers list is ready to switch back to egroups over this.

That can't be good news.


-- 
              Phil Barnett  mailto:midnight@the-oasis.net
                       WWW  http://www.the-oasis.net/
                  FTP Site  ftp://ftp.the-oasis.net