On Oct 11 2004, Bruce Lilly wrote:
I do accept that the possibility is there, but am yet to be convinced that
it happens so frequently to render inadequate the default behaviour of
sending list responses to the address that was subscribed.
What exactly is that supposed to mean? Responses go wherever the
respondent sends them.
Whatever you meant it to mean. I responded to the following quote from you:
An author might very well change his recommendation for responses
on a per-message basis.
I responded that's a possibility, but by far in most cases an author
wants responses sent to him via the mailing list, not directly, so that
ought to be default behaviour for this kind of advanced mailing list server.
I have no idea what version of mutt you're using; the version I've
seen (1.5.6i) has a group reply function and a reply function. I
believe that you may be mistaken in your beliefs.
I was thinking of Mutt's list-reply command. From the manual:
list-reply (default: L)
Reply to the current or tagged message(s) by extracting any addresses
which match the addresses given by the ``lists or subscribe''
commands, but also honor any Mail-Followup-To header(s) if the
``$honor_followup_to'' configuration variable is set. Using this when
replying to messages posted to mailing lists helps avoid duplicate
copies being sent to the author of the message you are replying to.
You're missing something fundamental. List expanders don't work
that way. Any proposal for a solution to the issue of communicating
authors' response preferences that is dependent upon replacing all
mailing list software is a non-starter.
We're going in circles. I accept that point fully, and have already
offered to end this discussion here before. Somehow, we're still
stuck on this thread ;-)
Thanks for the list of relevant RFCs, I'll be reading them shortly.
Fine, but that affects what he receives from the list, not what he
sends to wherever he sends it to. In particular, it does nothing
to address communicating his recommendations for responses to messages
that he authors.
That was my intention with the 'intelligent server" all along, but it
appears I failed to communicate that.