[Mailman-Users] Implicit destination
Stephen J. Turnbull
stephen at xemacs.org
Mon Dec 17 01:49:31 CET 2007
Mark Sapiro writes:
> Rod at freeserve wrote:
> >But does Mailman have to treat this as an implicit address?
Mark was generous. Yes, it does. Mailman is doing the right thing.
Your user's system is broken. Just because people rarely die from
misconfigured mail programs doesn't mean they are free from the
ethical obligation to fix them. A tool under their control is causing
problems for others (specifically you!) They should fix their tools,
or pay to have them fixed. Just like a car with bad brake lights.
Sure, AFAIK nobody has died from a misconfigured MUA yet, but it's
basically the same attitude: "Watch out world, here I come!"
> If this is a significant problem, I think the email library is the
> place to address it.
If it's that much of a problem, I would suggest configuring the MTA to
reject it, myself. But I think a better approach is to explain to the
user that her mail is being lost and delayed because it doesn't
conform to the standards that most systems do. It's not just Rob's
list-serving system where this will happen.
More information about the Mailman-Users