On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 02:38:15PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Faiz, > > In message <04e0144c-cad3-d242-0393-ba33afa3d...@ti.com> you wrote: > > > > > I am in the cc list of your first mail, but not from Simon's reply mail. > > > > So Peng got the email but the list is dropping CCs after it gets them. > > How do I avoid this in the future? Should I always add maintainers in To? > > We are investigating this. I _think_ (but this needs to be > verified, I just had a short look) that Mailman might try to bee too > clever; my speculation is that it might remove addresses from the > Cc: list wich have the "nodupes" option set in their profile. > Maybe mailman "thinks" that this is what it should do - otherwise > the recipient would receive dupes at least for a reply-to-all, one > trough the mailing list and the other through the Cc: > > But as mentioned, this needs to be investigated. > > I can see this ancient bug report [1], where a reply reads: > > In any case, this behavior is intentional by design. Cc: > recipients who are list members with their 'avoid duplicates' > option set are removed from the Cc: list to keep that list > from growing excessively in long threads with many > 'reply-all' replies. > > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/1216960 > > > So apparently a solution/workaoround could be to globally remove the > "nodupes" option for all subscribers, but I'm not sure if this is > what we should do. > > > I feel the key problem here is that we expect something from the > mailing list that it has not been designed for - the differentiation > between "this is just some random posting" and "this is a posting > which is specifically addressed to you". this may or may not work, > and it depends on several factors - how the mailing list tool works, > and how the recipient filters his incoming e-mail. > > But I don't have any clever solution either.
I'm a little wary of changing the global setting for everyone as well. Perhaps we just need to note the problem happened for now and see if it really happens again in the future, such that we need to consider such a heavy-handed work-around. Thanks for looking into this more! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
