Re: Mailman [ Was: can i have full alpha channel at client side? ]

[Tristan Van Berkom <vantr touchtunes com>]

Dimitar Haralanov wrote:
> Charles Schmidt <cschmidt2 emich edu> wrote:

<snip>
> > This is awful idea (despite what you think, and despite how clean and
> > perfect a solution it is) because it modifies the email.  This is a
> > horrible sin in email handling, imho.
> > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

More interresting points ;-)

<snip>
>         Besides the fact that this is rather off-topic, it is not necessary at
> all to munge headers to achieve the correct/desired behavior. As you can
> see (if your mailer permits), all messages to the list come with the
> convenient "List-*" headers, one of which is List-Post.
>         As an example, my mailer Sylpheed-Claws lets me choose whether I want
> to reply to the list, Reply-To All, or Reply-To Sender. In the case of
> the first one, it uses the List-Post header.

Ahhh, the voice of reason.

>         I am not convinced that this is a problem with Mailman but rather with
> the different mailers out there but that is just my opinion. I could be
> wrong.

I tend to agree with you. A significant amount of research has gone into
supporting Reply-To-Group; it would be a shame to take another
standpoint.

I'm not about to go and get a mailer that supports Reply-To-Group
though, if its not in the next distribution I install then every
one will continue to recieve dual copies of my mail (someone find
that offensive ?). Hey, I just write software; dont ask me to use
it properly on top of that ;-D

Cheers all,
                         -Tristan