1 |
On Thursday 14 April 2005 11:01, Andrea Barisani wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:54:35AM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
3 |
> > Hi all, |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > It appears that recently the mailing list server has enabled reply to |
6 |
> > munging. From previous discussions (about 2 years ago) it was decided |
7 |
> > not to do this reply to munging. What I want to ask is do we want to |
8 |
> > reconsider this decision, or do we want the reply-to munging be |
9 |
> > disabled again? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> The reply-to was set in almost all mailing lists with the old server. |
12 |
> During the migration I kept the Reply-To for all lists, I didn't notice |
13 |
> that gentoo-dev wasn't using it. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I agree that reply-to munging is a bad idea and I tried removing it |
16 |
> from gentoo-user receiving a lot of flames because of that, see also |
17 |
> this bug for something related about this topic: |
18 |
> |
19 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82887 |
20 |
> |
21 |
> I'm prefectly happy with removing our reply-to header (and leaving |
22 |
> user_defined one if any) if the userbase of this ml is happy to deal |
23 |
> without it. |
24 |
|
25 |
It also changed for the many smaller lists like -core, -nfp, -trustees, |
26 |
(basically all). Perhaps it could be changed such that only -user has the |
27 |
munging. |
28 |
|
29 |
Paul |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Paul de Vrieze |
33 |
Gentoo Developer |
34 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
35 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |