[Mailman-Developers] Reply-To: handling

[J C Lawrence]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 20:05:41 -0400 (EDT) 
bob  <bob@nleaudio.com> wrote:

> Chuq, I totally agree.  I had to "solve" a problem on one of my
> lists that ended up being a fairly prolific poster had his
> "Reply-to" set to his own address.  The list was set so that
> replies went to the list, but any reply to his messages on the
> list did not, due to his "reply-to" being set.

This is a standard feature (and many think a particularly good,
valuable, and desirable feature) of lists which don't munge
reply-to.  

Under the current Mailman behaviour (reply-to replacement) this
behaviour would not happen in a reply-to muinging list as the
poster's reply-to would be deleted and replaced by the list's
reply-to.  In the advocated case or reply-to extension, it also
wouldn't happen, as list's address would be added to the reply-to
header resulting in replies going to __BOTH__ the address the poster
specifies AND the list.

> IMHO, if you want replies to go to the list, they should ALWAYS go
> to the list.  

Which they do with reply-to munging lists for both reply to
replacement and reply-to extension.  This doesn't change.  The
choice is whether to munge reply-to or not.

> If they go to the user, then Reply-to could be acceptable to pass
> on, I suppose.

And if the list sets reply-to, why not _extend_ that reply to to
enclude not only the list's address, but also the address specified
by the poster?

-- 
J C Lawrence
---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu               He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.