[gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov]

It has come to my attention that "Reply-To" Munging is not a good idea
to have on mailing lists:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html .
For example, in my gmail account I see something like this in the
(prettified) header of each message from Gentoo's mailing lists:

From: Marco Fabbri <spiff1281@gmail.com>	Mailed-By: gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

and when I click "Reply" ("Reply to all" option does not exist for
Gentoo mailing lists) it automatically replies to the list rather than
the author of the thread.

Who is in charge of the mailing lists and would be the best person to
suggest this to? Should I send this to a different gentoo-* list?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Nick Rout]

It has been discussed before and IMHO should not change.

Please if you want to discuss go somewhere else like IRC.


On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:10:48 -0400
Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov wrote:

> It has come to my attention that "Reply-To" Munging is not a good idea
> to have on mailing lists:
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html .
> For example, in my gmail account I see something like this in the
> (prettified) header of each message from Gentoo's mailing lists:
> 
> From: Marco Fabbri <spiff1281@gmail.com>	Mailed-By: gentoo.org
> Reply-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> 
> and when I click "Reply" ("Reply to all" option does not exist for
> Gentoo mailing lists) it automatically replies to the list rather than
> the author of the thread.
> 
> Who is in charge of the mailing lists and would be the best person to
> suggest this to? Should I send this to a different gentoo-* list?
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Willie Wong]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:10:48PM -0400, Penguin Lover Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov squawked:
> Who is in charge of the mailing lists and would be the best person to
> suggest this to? Should I send this to a different gentoo-* list?

Big discussion over this about 18 months ago. 

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/120320/focus=120320

The change was made as you suggested, without announcement. 
Some users noticed, some didn't. 
One person asked about the change.
The whole thing eventually degenerated into a big hoopla and the
change reverted. 

Personally I don't care either way. My preferred MUA (mutt) is smart
enough and configurable enough to treat mailing lists properly. 

Best, 

W

-- 
Q: Why is the CERN ion accelerator circular and not linear?
A: It crosses international borders and Switzerland must remain neutral. 
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 5 days,  3:40
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Richard Fish]

On 7/31/06, Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov <ploujj@gmail.com> wrote:
> It has come to my attention that "Reply-To" Munging is not a good idea
> to have on mailing lists:
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html .

That is a matter of opinion.  I find the Reply-To munging to be very helpful.

> Who is in charge of the mailing lists and would be the best person to
> suggest this to? Should I send this to a different gentoo-* list?

http://bugs.gentoo.org, against infrastructure.  But my guess is that
it will likely be closed as WONTFIX, as this has come up before.

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov]

> Big discussion over this about 18 months ago.
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/120320/focus=120320
>

Thanks a lot. I didn't find the search functions on the archives sites
very helpful in finding an old thread about this.

> The change was made as you suggested, without announcement.
> Some users noticed, some didn't.
> One person asked about the change.
> The whole thing eventually degenerated into a big hoopla and the
> change reverted.

Oh well ... lets not repeat that then!
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[John J. Foster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 261 bytes --]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:43:09PM -0400, Willie Wong wrote:
> 
> My preferred MUA (mutt) is smart
> enough and configurable enough to treat mailing lists properly. 
> 
Here, here.

-- 
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Alexander Skwar]

Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov schrieb:
> It has come to my attention that "Reply-To" Munging is not a good idea
> to have on mailing lists:

This is wrong. It is *USEFUL*!

http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.html

> and when I click "Reply" ("Reply to all" option does not exist for
> Gentoo mailing lists) it automatically replies to the list rather than
> the author of the thread.

Yes, that's what's expected - the reply should go back, to where
it came from; back to the list.

> Who is in charge of the mailing lists and would be the best person to
> suggest this to?

Noone, as all is fine and correct the way it is.


> Should I send this to a different gentoo-* list?

No.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Alexander Skwar]

Alexander Skwar schrieb:
> Michael [Plouj] Ploujnikov schrieb:
>> It has come to my attention that "Reply-To" Munging is not a good idea
>> to have on mailing lists:
> 
> This is wrong. It is *USEFUL*!

http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml

Alexander Skwar
-- 
like:
	When being alive at the same time is a wonderful coincidence.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 414 bytes --]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:23:18 -0400, John J. Foster wrote:

> > My preferred MUA (mutt) is smart
> > enough and configurable enough to treat mailing lists properly. 
> > 
> Here, here.

Not everyone has a choice of MUA all the time. I'm all for leaving it as
it is, 99% of the time, replies to the list's posts should go back to the
list.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

One size fits all: Doesn't fit anyone.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[John J. Foster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 662 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:00:20AM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:23:18 -0400, John J. Foster wrote:
> 
> > > My preferred MUA (mutt) is smart
> > > enough and configurable enough to treat mailing lists properly. 
> > > 
> > Here, here.
> 
> Not everyone has a choice of MUA all the time. I'm all for leaving it as
> it is, 99% of the time, replies to the list's posts should go back to the
> list.
> 
Neil, my reply was not a two word discourse on how Reply-To should be
handled by list software, but merely a comment on Nick's choice of MUI.

festus
-- 
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] harmful "Reply-To" Munging on Gentoo mailing lists

[John J. Foster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 768 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 06:21:03AM -0400, John J. Foster wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:00:20AM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:23:18 -0400, John J. Foster wrote:
> > 
> > > > My preferred MUA (mutt) is smart
> > > > enough and configurable enough to treat mailing lists properly. 
> > > > 
> > > Here, here.
> > 
> > Not everyone has a choice of MUA all the time. I'm all for leaving it as
> > it is, 99% of the time, replies to the list's posts should go back to the
> > list.
> > 
> Neil, my reply was not a two word discourse on how Reply-To should be
> handled by list software, but merely a comment on Nick's choice of MUI.

Make that a MUA !

-- 
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]