OFFTOPIC Re: mailing list questions
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mikko_H=E4nninen?= (Mikko.Hanninen@dna.fi)
Mon, 15 May 2000 00:13:10 +0300
Hello,
This email is really off-topic, sorry about that. Feel free to delete
now if you're only interested in AfterStep issues and not AfterStep list
issues.
[INFLAMMATORY CONTENT WARNING]
ishamael@themes.org <ishamael@themes.org> wrote on Sun, 14 May 2000:
> about this reply to thing, i still dont understand why..... its so annoying
> to hit reply-to-all, then delete the senders addy just to get it replying
> to the list. what _benifits_ do we gain by replying to the sender?
> it was sent to the list, it should be replyed to the list.
Not necessarily.
By not changing it, people have the choice whether to reply to the list
or the person. If Reply-To *is* changed to point back to the list,
there is no way usually to reply to the person only, except by starting
a completely new message and then copy/paste the address.
Also, for example, I post with the address Mikko.Hanninen@dna.fi
(because that's my direct address and it's subscribed to the list,
and I need to use it order for my posts to go through). My Reply-To
address is set to Mikko.Hanninen@iki.fi because this is the address
I wish to receive (private) replies to, and this is the address I wish
to publicise (or wiz@iki.fi, another iki.fi address). If the list
would mungle Reply-To, then Mikko.Hanninen@iki.fi wouldn't be visible
at all in the headers. I don't want to get emails (except list emails)
to the dna.fi address.
Also, you do not *have* to delete the original sender's email address
when you do a "group reply". In fact, some of the posters may not be
subscribed at all, so if you direct the reply to the list alone, they
may not even get to see your reply. Because of this it's better to send
them a copy in private email as well. If they are subscribed to the
list, they will get two copies, but this is quite common.
David Mihm <dmihm@rchitecture.com> wrote on Sun, 14 May 2000:
> Yes, that's right 3 people, and those three people probably
> aren't even on the list; nor do they probably have any understanding of
> how lists/mail works.
For the record, I voted for "do not touch Reply-To", I'm on the list,
and I've run my own mailing list for 2 years now. I run my own mail
server for 2+ years and have spent this time subscribed to the server's
mailing list, reading the kind of questions people have and the answers
to them. In addition to that, I've been more or less involved for the
past year in the mailing lists for the Mutt email client. I've also
been subscribed for about half a year to the majordomo-users mailing
list.
So, I feel I have some understanding of Internet email and how mailing
lists in general work.
There are at least two separate solutions which have been developed
because of this issue. I think they should both be adapted by email
programs; if your email program doesn't have support for them, then
you should complain to the authors or whoever is supplying it and
get these features added.
The principal problem here is that email programs have no concept of
mailing lists. They just see From, To and Reply-To (and possibly
Sender). This doesn't really tell them if the To is your private
address or some email address.
So, the solution here is to *tell* email programs which addresses are
mailing lists and which are not. You can do this with the unix Mutt
email client. As a result of the client knowing which emails are "list
emails" and which aren't, you have a third function available besides
"Reply" and "Group Reply", it's called "List Reply" -- send a reply back
to the list.
There is another solution which has been proposed by Dan J. Bernstein
(of qmail and other such programs fame). This involves the header
Mail-Followup-To (hereafter: MFT) and also requires that the email
program knows which addresses are mailing lists you are subscribed to.
Whenever you send an email to a known mailing list, the email program
adds the MFT header and puts only the list address in that header.
Then whenever someone wants to do a "followup" post, the MFT header
tells the email program that followups should go only to the list.
The intention is that with a "Group Reply", if the MFT header is
present, this should take precedence over what the email program
normally uses for creating the recipient list of such an email.
If you post to a known mailing list you are *not* subscribed to, then
Mutt has an extension for this situation: it will include both the list
address *and* your personal address in the MFT header. This way, the
email program of someone who is posting a "followup" will know to send
it to both to the list and your personal address.
Anyway, the point here is... The fundamental problem is not whether
Reply-To should be set to list or not, but that most email programs
don't understand about mailing lists, nor support any features that
make posting to such lists more convenient. I know most email programs
don't support the features I've described above, but that CAN be
changed. Trying to fix the situation by changing the Reply-To of
mailing list posts is only a "bubble-gum solution", it sort of works but
in the end it will eventually break, and it won't fix the real issue.
In fact it may make fixing the real issue less likely, since it may make
people think "but we already have a solution..."
(For the record, I've approximated some of the issues and left some
things out, for a better definition of the MFT header you should
probably read DJB's text at http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html.)
Mikko
--
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // wiz@iki.fi // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
Donna Air on MTV interviewing the Corrs: 'So how did you meet?'
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, simply type the following at #
echo "unsubscribe as-users <your_email>" | mail majordomo@afterstep.org