Sheng Let's get the VOTE started
> -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Zhang [mailto:frank.zh...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 1:37 PM > To: 'Sheng Yang'; Alex Huang > Cc: Chip Childers; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Alex Karasulu > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Should cloudstack-dev mailing list strip "Reply-to" > header? > > 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 > > >>> >
