[sclug] Reply-to: sclug?

[John Stumbles]

Roland Turner (SCLUG) wrote:
> John Stumbles wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>>Having yet again cluelessly replied to the sender of a message rather
>>than the list can I suggest/request that whoever maintains this list
>>set  it so that messages from the list have either From: or Reply-to:
>>the list?
>>
>>Or has this been discussed & dismissed before for some reason?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know whether this has has been discussed before on this list, but
> it certainly has been at great length on many others!
> 
> What you suggest would have the effect of actively breaking correctly
> behaving software for the benefit of careless users and/or those who are
> using antediluvian MUAs/mail-clients. This not only breaches the principle
> of least surprise ---8<---

Well /I/ am surprised when I hit 'Reply' to a message from a list and it 
just goes to the message author, not to the list!

What is Reply-To intended for anyway? RFC822 says

4.4.3.  REPLY-TO / RESENT-REPLY-TO

         This field provides a general  mechanism  for  indicating  any
         mailbox(es)  to which responses are to be sent.  Three typical
         uses for this feature can  be  distinguished.   In  the  first
         case,  the  author(s) may not have regular machine-based mail-
         boxes and therefore wish(es) to indicate an alternate  machine
         address.   In  the  second case, an author may wish additional
         persons to be made aware of, or responsible for,  replies.   A
         somewhat  different  use  may be of some help to "text message
         teleconferencing" groups equipped with automatic  distribution
         services:   include the address of that service in the "Reply-
         To" field of all messages  submitted  to  the  teleconference;
         then  participants  can  "reply"  to conference submissions to
         guarantee the correct distribution of any submission of  their
         own.

I assume what we now call a "list" is what they meant in 1982 by ""text 
message teleconferencing" groups equipped with automatic  distribution 
        services". It sounds as if the authors of the rfc anticipated 
this situation and made provision for it.

> If you really are using software so old/broken that it
> doesn't have seperate operations/options for replying to sender, list or
> all then, seriously, upgrade.

I don't know how old/broken Mozilla (1.6) is: it has options 'Reply' and 
'Reply All'. It's not all I wish for but I've tried 
Thunderball/Firecracker and frankly they're raw-edged compared to 
Moz[1]. I do have a newer version which I would like to install but only 
when I'm sure I can backtrack to the existing one if the new version is 
  broken :-)

To use pine I'd have to get fetchmail and spamassasin running for the 
same functionality, which might be a worthwhile thing to do in the 
longer term but right now I've got other fish to fry. Dunno about kmail. 
Reason I went for Moz was that I already had my mail in mozilla format 
from using it on whinedos.

Anyway I don't want to start a religious war about it, just wondered if 
it was one of those things that either hadn't been done because no-one 
had suggested it, or alternatively that was so outrageous that everyone 
gasps in horror at the mere thought of it :-)


[1] e.g. in Moz I can right-click on a link in mail/news and select 
option to open in new tab and it does that, whereas with TB/FF you're 
lucky to get it to open up the linked page rather than a locally-saved 
copy of it, let alone not have it replace your current page

cheers

-- 
John Stumbles                                      mobile 0780 866 8204
plumbing:heating:electrical:property maintenance     home 0118 954 2406