[Python-Dev] [Mailman-Developers] Re: ML replies (was: CVS: python/dist/src/PCbuild readme.txt,1.5,1.6)

Chuq Von Rospach chuqui@plaidworks.com
Sat, 1 Jul 2000 09:34:19 -0700

At 12:16 PM -0400 7/1/00, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:

>     GS> What about the Mail-Followup-To header? That can be helpful
>     GS> for some newsreaders (e.g. Mutt). Dunno how many observe it.
>It looks like VM/Emacs doesn't (which is what I use), but I'm sure
>that'd be easy to add.  I would be most interested to know what
>Outlook and NS do with it.
>However Mail-Followup-To: isn't in any RFC that I can find, not even

It's non-standard, and in fact, arguably non-compliant, since any 
unofficial header should be in the X-headername form.

>So there is clearly no header that will support the functionality we

This is a case where Reply-To is the correct header to set, or at 
least, least incorrect.

>One potential solution for Mailman might be to lie about the To:
>address.  So in the above scenario, the message would have a To: field
>set to python-dev even though the message would actually be sent to
>the python-checkins membership.

um, uh, well... I don't like it. Even if you had Sender: and List-ID 
set properly, it still seems wrong.

For this case, I think the best setup is Reply-to, because that's 
waht you want: it came FROM this place, but responses go to this 
other place. The proper answer is setting reply-to, not attempting to 
rearrange the concept of "from this place".

As a strong proponent of "don't use reply-to!" -- this is a case 
where it's the proper answer. It's not perfect by any means, since 
reply-to coerces someone away from replying privately, but in this 
situation, that's better than not doing it.

Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com)

And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar
and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'"