Daryle Walker <darylew@hotmail.com> writes:
On 7/22/06 8:26 AM, "David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
Daryle Walker <darylew@hotmail.com> writes:
Currently, the mailing list changes all the "reply-to" headers to the list's e-mail address. This forces all replies to go to the list and loses any custom e-mail address the sender may have added. I've read "'Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful" <http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html> and now wonder if we should change our policy.
The mods read that when setting the policy originally and we decided it was not a good choice for Boost.
Even though the alterations (currently) obliterate whatever the original poster may have had in the "reply-to" field?
Yes
This cripples senders that must use a separate receiving address.
I don't know what that means.
Since the "reply-to" field is supposed to override the "from" field, reply-to -all and -sender-only functions are also messed up.
Yes, sender-only is an unfortunate casualty. The upside is that when you reply to a message in the usual way, it goes to the list. Otherwise, IIRC, it ends up going to some individual instead of the list, and then I at least don't notice that my reply went out privately... or it goes to the individual _and_ the list, and people get multiple copies of the same message. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com