[Mailman-Developers] SF bug report #223533

[Barry A. Warsaw]

>>>>> "CVR" == Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> writes:

    CVR> I feel that flagging them with a list-id of foobar.domain.org
    CVR> is incorrect, because the source is the server, not the
    CVR> list. It's about the list, but not from the list. I think
    CVR> that's an important distinction.

I agree that it's an important distinction to make, and further I'll
agree that the RFC clause /could/ be interpreted that way.

The problem I have is that what seems more intuitive to me, is that
List-Id: would be included in admin messages, /and/ they would have
the listname in them, but admin messages wouldn't have the the other
List-* headers.  I don't see where the other List-* headers make much
sense for an admin message, but the List-ID header /does/ make sense
for such a posting.

IOW, List-ID: identifies the list, and admin messages are definitely
tied to a particularly list, not (currently) the list server.

Would you agree that we wouldn't be breaking the RFCs if we
implemented that policy?  Do you agree that this is a useful
interpretation?

It makes sense to me.  If I were writing some filter on messages, I'd
look for the List-ID to figure out which list this message pertains
to, then I'd look for List-Post to see if this were a list posting or
an admin message (it's absence would mean "admin message").

Could you live with that?

-Barry