Dragon writes: > I meant to send this to the list but it only went out to the OP, damned > reply-to setting on this list (I know, I know, y'all think it is good, I > STILL disagree and always will).
Hey, feel free to write an RFC and update 2822. For now, Reply-To is an author header, and therefore should not be changed en route by a conforming agent, any more than From, Date, or Message-ID. Mailman of all lists should take RFC 2822 seriously. A better answer would be to get an MUA that recognizes RFC 2369 List-Post headers (and optionally a user-configurable list of addresses to treat the same way if they are the To address), and automatically adds those addresses to the To or CC. N.B. I do agree with the "Considered Harmful" crowd, because I use Reply-To on a regular basis for list traffic control, as well as for list posts where I request a personal response for some reason. But really, the important thing is that 2822 is a very good excuse for a standard, and we should adapt our software to it rather than subvert it where our software sucks. ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
