Let's just get the vote start
> -----Original Message----- > From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 12:06 PM > To: Alex Huang > Cc: Chip Childers; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Alex Karasulu > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Should cloudstack-dev mailing list strip "Reply-to" > header? > > In fact I just found adding "Reply-to" on behavior of mailing list server > violated the IETF's definition of email. > > Accord to the latest RFC 5322(obsoletes RFC 2822, which obsoletes RFC > 822) on "Internet Message Format"[1], 3.6.2 Originator Fields: > > <quote> > When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it > indicates the address(es) to which the author of the message suggests > that replies be sent. > </quote> > > Apparently, mailing list server is NOT the author of message, so it have no > privilege to add this field to the mail. > > Also, it's recommended to read the article by Chip Rosenthal(which provided > by Alex in the previous mail)[2], titled `"Reply-To" Munging Considered > Harmful`. > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.2 > [2] http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > --Sheng > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: > > OK, I would call a formal vote myself today. > > > > --Sheng > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> > wrote: > >> Sheng, > >> > >> You should setup the vote yourself. The consensus of the thread seems > to be toward reverting. > >> > >> I would say for your idea to have a fair chance, you should encourage > people to read this link [1] specifically before voting. > >> > >> --Alex > >> > >> [1] http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] > >>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:44 AM > >>> To: Chip Childers > >>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Alex Karasulu > >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Should cloudstack-dev mailing list strip "Reply-to" > >>> header? > >>> > >>> Hi Chip, > >>> > >>> Could you set up a formal vote thread for this? > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >>> --Sheng > >>> On Feb 7, 2013 6:45 AM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:04:07PM +0200, Alex Karasulu wrote: > >>> > > Ooops sent this to Brett directly. Thanks for the heads up Brett. > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > And here's our problem! > >>> > > >>> > Can we please ask to have the change reverted? > >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Alex Karasulu > >>> > > <akaras...@apache.org> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Brett Porter > >>> > > > <br...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> On 07/02/2013, at 12:05 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> > wrote: > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > The previous setting won't respect CC after the CCed guy > >>> > > >> > replied > >>> > mail. > >>> > > >> > I don't think that's useful. > >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > I truly believe it's developer's responsible to keep track > >>> > > >> > of their own topic, but I also think make it easier for > >>> > > >> > developer to keep > >>> > track > >>> > > >> > is better. > >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> This seems like an edge case to me... most of the time a > >>> > > >> developer > >>> > that > >>> > > >> contributes to a thread will remember to follow that subject > >>> > > >> (as I am > >>> > doing > >>> > > >> here). If that might be a problem, they have alternatives: > >>> > > >> - CC themselves on messages they send, so they remain on the > >>> > > >> CC list > >>> > > >> - set up filters to label threads that include their name > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> Do these seem like better alternatives than altering the list > >>> > reply-to? > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > > I agree with Brett here. Filters are a life saver by the way. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Also with the javelin branch merged, some of the envisioned > >>> > > > component-ization activities might enable a better mailing > >>> > > > list organization. This is all good stuff to consider and > >>> > > > possibly take > >>> > care of > >>> > > > at graduation time if it still seems necessary. WDYT? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > Best Regards, > >>> > > > -- Alex > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > -- > >>> > > Best Regards, > >>> > > -- Alex > >>> >
