Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list. Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs)
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:51:55 -0700 Lynda <shrdlu@deaddrop.org> wrote:
I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list.
Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back.
I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list.
-- John
John Peach (john-nanog) writes:
Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back.
I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list.
From the headers. X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org> Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not. Cheers, Phil
On Oct 15, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Phil Regnauld wrote:
John Peach (john-nanog) writes:
Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back.
I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list.
From the headers.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org>
Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not.
Yes, he said he set reply-to himself. Look at your own post, it has no such header. -- TTFN, patrick
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/15/11 5:17 PM, Phil Regnauld wrote:
John Peach (john-nanog) writes:
Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back.
I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list.
From the headers.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org>
Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not.
I think you missed John's last sentence, Phil... For instance, on *this* email, and *your* email, a reply goes to the individual. I have to specifically put the list address in. Perhaps Lynda hit someone's manually-set Reply-to header and thought it was set by Mailman... Best, - --Glenn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6Z+XYACgkQf5MxTDXTimFXRgCfUTlQmwPfqL6atcwoGyRi5ERq +7IAoIyILrdRDekx0tnxLw6qV/FhqelS =1Vrf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 23:17:58 +0200 Phil Regnauld <regnauld@nsrc.org> wrote:
John Peach (john-nanog) writes:
Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back.
I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list.
From the headers.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org>
Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not.
That's the reply-to my MTA puts in there: X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/options/nanog>, <mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog> List-Post: <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> List-Help: <mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog>, <mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+john-nanog=johnpeach.com@nanog.org
Cheers, Phil
-- John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynda" <shrdlu@deaddrop.org>
I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list.
It's you, Lynda. Really. :-) Your message, frex, did not have reply-to munged; I had to do it by hand (since Zimbra 6 is still too stupid; I've had that bug open for over 2 years now; maybe 7 fixes it). One reply to you did, but the rest did not. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
On 10/15/2011 3:23 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynda"<shrdlu@deaddrop.org>
I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list.
It's you, Lynda. Really. :-)
Well, *now* I know it's not mailman, but it's not me, either. Not exactly. What I noticed was that *some* of the email to Nanog, today, had this set, but not all. I was very confused (it's not the first time I've been confused, of course).
Your message, frex, did not have reply-to munged; I had to do it by hand (since Zimbra 6 is still too stupid; I've had that bug open for over 2 years now; maybe 7 fixes it). One reply to you did, but the rest did not.
Yeah, Mr Peach set an evil trap for me. I'd been about to send him a private email (on something of absolutely no importance), and when I realized it went back to Nanog, was puzzled enough to check to see whether it had been changed. Cleverly, I tested replies to a couple of other emails, and as luck would have it, one was my own (and tbird has a stupid habit of knowing that if it's a mailing list, I surely meant to send it to the list), and the other two were both to Mr Peach. Sorry for noise. Back to making sure Geoff H believes us, and keeps right on sending the reports. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs)
participants (6)
-
Glenn Sieb -
Jay Ashworth -
John Peach -
Lynda -
Patrick W. Gilmore -
Phil Regnauld