[Mailman-Developers] Does mailman-cvs remove reply-to?

[Barry A. Warsaw]

>>>>> "MM" == Marc MERLIN <marc_news@vasoftware.com> writes:

    MM> Mmmh, I'm really not sure why one would want that.

I think the idea is that a list admin might want to force
reply-to-alls to go back to the whole list.
    
    MM> Would you agree that this setting was really meant to select
    MM> whether, only in the case where you do listwide reply-to
    MM> munging, you replace the reply-to with the list reply-to or
    MM> you add the list reply-to to the sender's set reply-to?

I don't remember, but thinking about it now, I think there's little
harm in allowing the list admin to strip reply-to even if they're not
going to munge it.  I'm not saying it's a good idea, but then we all
know where that leads to. ;)
    
    MM> In this case, would you also agree that since RFC 2822 does
    MM> allow two addresses or more in the Reply-to header,
    MM> DEFAULT_FIRST_STRIP_REPLY_TO should really default to 0,
    MM> because your code that extends the existing reply-to allows
    MM> for the reply to go to both the list and the reply-to address
    MM> the sender specified?

Yes, it should default to 0.  I'll make that change.

-Barry