Bug in mailing lists; unfriendly to non-subscribers
tomh0665 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 5 20:33:34 UTC 2010
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Felipe Contreras
<felipe.contreras at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Tom H <tomh0665 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Felipe Contreras
>> <felipe.contreras at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The problem is not in the system.
>> The sender has to realise that he/she has sent a private email! LOL
> Yeah, so? It's a user mistake, it's up to the user how to deal with it.
One of the roles of an administrator is to help users...
>> It is much less problematic for "reply" to reply to the list,
>> especially if changing that behavior is solely meant to help those who
>> don't want to subscribe to it...
> No, as I said before, the Reply-To problem is *orthogonal*.
> See, I'm _subscribed_, right?
> When I search for 'list:users.lists.fedoraproject.org
> to:felipe.contreras' I don't find anything (well, I actually I see one
> mail because Alan Cox ignored the Reply-To header).
> OTOH 'list:linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org to:felipe.contreras' works fine.
> Also, what happens if I choose to stay subscribed, but decide to turn
> mail delivery off? Well, I can send mails, but I will not get the
> So no, the drawbacks of Reply-To munging are not limited to non-subscribers.
If you subscribe to a list but opt not to receive emails from that
list, you are not a member of that list's community and your desires
and needs should not be catered to.
To go back to debian-user, it is set up the way that you would like
for the only reason that I consider acceptable (even though I disagree
with it) and that is that messages that are intended to be private are
not sent to the entire list (admins helping users?).
>>>> 2. Many people hit "reply all" and the person they are replying to
>>>> complains that he/she has received two emails.
>>> That's because either they are stupid or their system is stupid, and
>>> their MUA is not right.
>>> In Feodra's case mailman is used, which has the option:
>>> "Avoid duplicate copies of messages?"
>> When someone sends an email to a person and to debian-user and that
>> person is subscribed to debian-user, two emails are received, one of
>> which does not go through the list server so its settings don't come
>> into play.
> And that's the only mail the person will receive. The list server will
> see, oh, that mail was sent directly, so I'm not going to do it again.
> Did you even read the description?
> Avoid duplicate copies of messages?
> When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list
> message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the mailing
> list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the mailing list;
> select No to receive copies.
> If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you elect to
> receive copies, every copy will have a X-Mailman-Copy: yes header
> added to it.
>>> You seem to have it on by default. Problem solved.
>> I think that you mean "the people who complain have it on by default"
>> because I have never received duplicate emails, nor complained about
> No, the people who complain (if the ml uses mailman (not everyone
> does)) have it *off*.
> Fedora mailing lists (or at lest this one) has it on by default;
> that's why you would not see this problem (in case somebody overrides
> the Reply-To header).
My bad. I hadn't considered the possibility that the ml app
would/could be smart enough to check the to: and cc: fields...
More information about the users