Re: [PATCH] Lose perl dependency. (fwd)
- From
Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com>
- Date
- Jan 23, 2007, 17:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <86bqkp1xkz.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <m3irexzua9.fsf@maximus.localdomain>
>>>>> "Krzysztof" == Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> writes:
Krzysztof> Actually it is the correct way to do that. If people "reply to group" Krzysztof> or whatever is it called, the reply goes to "Reply-To" list. Krzysztof> If they "reply to author", the reply goes to "From" address and Krzysztof> "Reply-To" is ignored.
Argh. Such misinformation abounds on this topic!
The only reason a mail client has the ability to ignore the "reply-to" (which *violates* the RFCs - go check it out) is because of *broken* (but perhaps well-intentioned) mailing lists that add "reply-to: list".
The proper solution is to *follow* the RFCs, and leave the reply-to alone when relaying. If someone wants to reply to the list *and* the person, they can reply to both the "from (or reply-to)" and "to" addresses, often called a "wide reply". If someone wants to reply to just the person, they use the "reply-to" if it's present, or the "from" if not. This is *proper* behavior: it's only some broken mailing lists out there that have caused us to have to work around it.
-- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!