> Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote on Friday, March 30, 2007 3:31 PM -0500: > > The whole fact that "majority" of other mailing lists and their users > > does not know about this does not mean it's useless.
On 30.03.07 16:33, Seth Goodman wrote: > You mean it _could_ be useful if most others went along, which they > haven't. I "mean" that "it's bad that ONLY in debian lists it makes sense to reply to author, list and both, while for all other mailing lists it there's only one choice". > There are a lot of things about normal SMTP practice that > violate recent RFC's and I personally don't like. For something > that doesn't affect mail transport, but is a matter of how MUA's > interpret trace headers, most people feel they have bigger fish to > fry. To fix this problem, you need to convince not only the makers > of numerous MTA's to change, but the maintainers of mailing list > packages and a large number of mailing list administrators. This is not about MTAs and SMTP here. This is about e-mail headers and MUAs. > That's a large enough hurdle that I think it safe to say the horse > has left the barn on this one a long time ago. Continuing to insist > that things _should_ have been different, long past the point where > that is feasible, only makes us look foolish. In that, we have been > successful. This thread started with complaining about non-existent Reply-To: headers set by the list. Some people, including me, say that there are much better ways to solve the mailing list reply problem. Maybe you should read this thread again. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
