[Mailman-Developers] feature request: new option for reply_goes_to_list

[Peter C. Norton]

On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 06:52:17PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> [I hope you don't mind that I redirect this to the list, I think I have a
> suggestion to improve mailman 2.1
> 
> On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 06:31:28PM -0700, Peter C. Norton wrote:
> > BTW, the reason that I set reply-to's on one of the lists I run is
> > that when a thread gets going and lots of people start responding, for
> > some reason the Cc: list grew as long as my arm.  And I got really
> 
> That's indeed a minor problem, but at least with the nodupes feature in
> mailman 2.1, you only get one copy.
> 
> Now that I  think of it, it wouldn't  be too hard for mailman  when it sends
> the list copy out to (optionally) remove from Cc all the Emails from members
> that have the nodupes option set.
> That way, the  Cc would be left  only with Emails that  aren't subscribed to
> the list.
> 
> What do you think?

That would definetly limit the # of Cc:'s on a message.  Its an
interesting approach, though perhaps too subtle.  I think it would be
appropriate to also have an option that just stripped Cc's.

> > Though many people know better, my experience even on a somewhat
> > technical list is that most people don't exercise any discipline in
> > discriminating who they reply to, and they assume that the list is
> > going to work with their mailer and dtrt.  So I work with that
> > assumption.
>  
> Unfortunately you aren't the only one. Am  I so deluted to still want people
> to learn and  know just a tiny  little bit about their mail  clients and use
> them properly?

Marc, I noticed that I got 2 of these messages in my inbox.  Even
though you know I'm subscribed to mailman-developers, you sent me a
copy.  This is the thing that I use reply-to forcing to prevent.  I
suspect you did this on purpose, so I'd like to hear whave you had in
mind when you sent this.

> Note that I'm not  just bitching, I did spend many hours  writing a patch to
> do reply-to munging per receipient so  that people who really aren't willing
> to learn and/or bitch  too loudly can be given the option  just for them and
> then  they leave  you in  peace (announced  here a  few months  ago, and  an
> outdated copy is here:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2002-March/018145.html
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail-21/mailman-developers/2002-March/011068.html
> http://marc.merlins.org/tmp/replyto.diff.cvs )
> 
> Unfortunately it never made the cut for mailman 2.1

I know how you feel.  I'm going to have to apply my patch to
automaticly reject messages from addresses that aren't subscribed to
2.0.x.  I wish I could have written it before 2.0 came out.  On the
positive side I know a lot more about python now, and maybe I can
update my patch to use withlist to make old lists behave the right
way, and to remove the stuff I put in for 2.x where x > 0.

-Peter

-- 
The 5 year plan:
In five years we'll make up another plan.
Or just re-use this one.