[OT] Reply-To munging considered *carefully*

[Barry Warsaw]

On Oct 13, 2009, at 7:02 AM, Ben Finney wrote:

> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:
>
>> The upshot is that there is no RFC-sanctioned way for a list to say
>> "please respond here"
>
> RFC 2369 defines fields for mailing list messages, including exactly  
> the
> above purpose: the ‘List-Post’ field.
>
>    The List-Post field describes the method for posting to the list.
>
>    <URL:http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2369>
>
> Those fields have been provided in every mailing list message I've  
> seen
> for the last *ten years*. That way, you can keep on using the existing
> “reply to author”, “reply to list”, and “reply to all” operations that
> most MUAs have provided for many years.

Not quite.  This is way way off topic for this mailing list, so I've  
set the Reply-To to mailman-developers at python.org and will try  
mightily to refrain from following up further on this mailing list.

List-Post tells people how to post original messages to a particular  
mailing list.  It doesn't help at all with replies to mailing list  
messages.  For example, a foo-announce list would use X-Stephens-New- 
Goodness header to direct follow up messages to a foo-discuss list.   
There's currently no principled way for a mailing list to be  
configured to specify that, so we have to resort to standards-busting  
methods like hijacking Reply-To.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20091013/6b0069af/attachment.pgp