From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Lose perl dependency. (fwd) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:07:08 -0800 Message-ID: <86bqkp1xkz.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> References: <7vwt3h7dp6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200701210137.41219.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> <17842.53449.35322.514320@lisa.zopyra.com> <7vr6tp5aqq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <87vej0gh4k.fsf@morpheus.local> <873b6197jf.fsf@morpheus.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E5gedal?= , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 23 18:07:40 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H9P7R-0004FR-MQ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:07:38 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933089AbXAWRHf (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:07:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933093AbXAWRHe (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:07:34 -0500 Received: from blue.stonehenge.com ([209.223.236.162]:22439 "EHLO blue.stonehenge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933089AbXAWRHe (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:07:34 -0500 Received: by blue.stonehenge.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6E1171DE65B; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:07:08 -0800 (PST) To: Krzysztof Halasa x-mayan-date: Long count = 12.19.14.0.1; tzolkin = 3 Imix; haab = 14 Muan In-Reply-To: (Krzysztof Halasa's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:34:22 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (berkeley-unix) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: >>>>> "Krzysztof" == Krzysztof Halasa writes: Krzysztof> Actually it is the correct way to do that. If people "reply to group" Krzysztof> or whatever is it called, the reply goes to "Reply-To" list. Krzysztof> If they "reply to author", the reply goes to "From" address and Krzysztof> "Reply-To" is ignored. Argh. Such misinformation abounds on this topic! The only reason a mail client has the ability to ignore the "reply-to" (which *violates* the RFCs - go check it out) is because of *broken* (but perhaps well-intentioned) mailing lists that add "reply-to: list". The proper solution is to *follow* the RFCs, and leave the reply-to alone when relaying. If someone wants to reply to the list *and* the person, they can reply to both the "from (or reply-to)" and "to" addresses, often called a "wide reply". If someone wants to reply to just the person, they use the "reply-to" if it's present, or the "from" if not. This is *proper* behavior: it's only some broken mailing lists out there that have caused us to have to work around it. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!