[LAU] Goodbye ReplyTo munging...

Loki Davison loki.davison at gmail.com
Tue Aug 14 19:45:05 EDT 2007

On 8/15/07, Florin Andrei <florin at andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> Marc-Olivier Barre wrote:
> > On 8/14/07, Florin Andrei <florin at andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> >> Oh great, now filtering is broken, because I only get one copy of the
> >> message, the one sent to my email, while the "list copy" does not get
> >> sent to me, so filtering by List-Id (which is default on many email
> >> clients, both desktop- and web-based) does not work.
> >
> > Right, so deactivating reply-to munging broke  your filter... Of
> > course. Did it occur to you that it might just be you filters that are
> > broken ?
> OK, stay with me for a while and let's reason together.
> Filtering based on List-Id is filtering based on something that the
> mailing list server does. It relies on actions taken by the mailing list
> server, which do not depend on what the email client of the sender does.
> Therefore, it is more reliable because it does not change with every
> different email client.
> If I set the list to remove duplicates, I only receive the private
> reply, which depends on the email client of the sender, which may or may
> not do the right thing. Therefore, filtering is less reliable, because
> it depends on all those email clients out there to do something.
> By forcing a Reply-To header, all messages are forced to go through the
> mailing list server, therefore something (such as setting the List-Id)
> can be done to each message, which allows for reliable and simple
> filtering: only one header, it never changes (unless someone changes the
> settings on the mailing list server).
> By de-centralizing the message routing, all that is lost.
> --
> Florin Andrei

Florin, Thaght shalt not use sensible arguments and clear cases of
positives. You must only state that one system is approved by
all-knowing supream powers. Please cease stating how the new system is
annoying for nearly everyone and the only supposed positive is that
replies that are meant to be private can be sent by mistake to the
list. Mmm... i think this last bit might actually be a counter to
Fons's elistism statement.


More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list