[Mailman-Developers] handling duplicate mails
Wed, 17 Oct 2001 01:17:24 -0700
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 11:41:04AM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 08:33:44AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > > What problem are you trying to tackle?
> > People who are trying to set reply-to munging because they don't want
> > receipients to receive two copies of the posts. While the solution is bad,
> > the initial need is real.
> > (well, there is also that part about "reply to all" being apparently much
> > harder to use than "reply", but I tend to dismiss that)
> Yes, but note that (as I mentioned earlier), the fact that you got a
> copy from the list *carries a meaning* additional to its content: that
> the rest of the list got to see it also.
Oh, don't take me wrong, I'm fully aware of that.
(second paragraph of "So what does this mean for the list users?"
> If I was on a list, and got copies of messages to me that were *not*
> also carboned to me, but did *not* get messages from the list which it
> "noticed" *were* carboned to me as well, *I* would assume the list
> wasn't reliable, and I suspect I'm not alone.
That was already answered, but again, the patch makes it a per user option.
> People who get duplicate copies because senders don't understand how to
> deal with mailing lists, or who won't switch to a *mailer* that
> understands how to deal with mailing lists, should have the pain of the
> recipients we're trying to protect here transferred to *them*.
Can I have you answer the Sourceforge tickets^H^H^H^H^H^Hflames from people
who are telling me that their life absolutely ends if they can't have the
reply-to munging on their list? :-&
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger email@example.com for PGP key