lists(_at_)professional(_dot_)org (Professional Software Engineering - Lists
Philip Guenther wrote thusly:
Folks, if you don't want people to cc replies to your messages to you,
then stick a "Reply-To:" header in _your_ outgoing messages that points
Poor idea. It may stop some mailers from CCing on a reply-to-all function,
but it will not sot all. Further it will me it more difficult to reply
off the list to something. A message-ID duplicate killer is better.
Something like the "X-Curtesy-Copy: never" protocol discussed in some
newsgroups might be better. It could be used to trigger a formail
insertion of a Reply-To: header, which would make it instantly a lot
more functional than that header ever will be in news.
Good idea. Now I've got a whole separate config for when I'm on this list.
Heh. I have whole seperate configs for everything.
cause their Reply-All to fetch the reply-to, cc, and original to: addresses
and use them all to reply to -- and if the reply-to happens to be the same
and the to: or cc: then there will be TWO copies of the same address in the
SmartList itself will kill duplicates (based on message ID) so that is
not a real problem.
But hey, at least its someone else sending two copies, and not me, so what
should I care?
There is no cure for some ailments.
I agree that this isn't necessarily the best solution here. However, I'd
like to offer that anybody posting replies on the list should have the
courtesy to remove direct replies when they are obviously unnessesary -
I never CC to the list. On a few rare occasions I have written seperate
responses sent to the list and to individual people, but normally I just
send to one or the other. (In all honesty, I never even thought of using
a reply-to-all function. In seven years on-line, I have probably used that
less than a dozen times.)
* ^X-Curtesy-Copy: never
* ^X-Mailing-List: *<?\/[^<>]+
| formail -I"Reply-To: $MATCH"