[Mailman-Users] 2.1.18 internal documentation suggestions

Lindsay Haisley fmouse at fmp.com
Fri May 2 08:29:27 CEST 2014

On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 22:09 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> So it seems clear to me that we're *adding* the From: address to
> Reply-To: and the only question is how does first_strip_reply_to affect
> this, and the answer is if it's Yes, the Reply-To: we're adding to was
> stripped and is empty, and if No we're adding to the original. Do I have
> to repeat that last bit further down?

I hadn't considered that a Reply-To: address can be plural, which makes
perfect sense.  A single sentence, perhaps just a reference to other
text, covering first_strip_reply_to = No might be in order to pair with
your explicit discussion of first_strip_reply_to = Yes.

The whole issue is complex, and the measures in Mailman to address it
are similarly complex.  Your changes to the internal docs are certainly
an improvement and probably about as good as can be done with a bad
situation.  There may be a problem with being _too_ wordy in explaining

Here's a suggestion:

        first_strip_reply_to = Yes will remove all the incoming
        addresses but will still add the poster's address to Reply-To:
        for all three settings of reply_goes_to_list which respectively
        will result in just the poster's address, the poster's address
        and the list posting address or the poster's address and the
        explicit reply_to_address in the outgoing Reply-To: header.  If
        first_strip_reply_to = No the poster's address in the From:
        header, if not already included in the Reply-To:, will be
        appended to any existing Reply-To: address(es).
Last sentence added.  Is this correct, and reasonable?

Lindsay Haisley       | "Everything works if you let it"
FMP Computer Services |
512-259-1190          |          --- The Roadie
http://www.fmp.com    |

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list