Julian Foad <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> writes:
> Yes. I have just noticed and re-sent.
>
> I'm not used to mailing lists that don't munge Reply-to to point to
> the list. My mail client, Mozilla, doesn't have a "Reply to mailing
> list" function, so I have to remember to use "Reply all" (do you want
> to receive a personal copy as well as the one to the list?) or change
> the "To" address manually. Is there a policy on Reply-to?
Yes, the policy is not to munge it. If you Google on "Reply-to
Munging Considered Harmful" you'll see why. There are also documents
explaining the opposite point of view. This list did not have perfect
agreement on the question, but the informal consensus was that more
people thought munging bad than good.
> I tried
> setting "Reply-to" to point back to the list in a message that I sent,
> because I don't want to receive two copies of each reply, but the list
> server removed it. Some people (including you, Karl) specify a
> Reply-to which is a personal address different from the address you
> send from, and the list server removes that too. That seems a bit
> sub-optimal.
Huh? Our list server is supposed to not touch Reply-to. If mine is
getting munged, how do you know that I set it? :-) Are you sure you
saw what you saw?
As for duplicates, your mail client might have an option to fold them
into one.
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Feb 3 03:07:37 2003