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
> >>> >

Reply via email to