linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org is a pain

linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org is a pain

[Douglas Gilbert]

Seems I'm not the only one sending posts to the
linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org bit bucket.

Could the maintainer of lsml either:
  - get rid of linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
  - or forward posts in there to lsml

That bright idea might save the maintainer time but
it wastes ours.

Doug Gilbert

Re: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org is a pain

[James Bottomley]

On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 17:10 -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> Seems I'm not the only one sending posts to the
> linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org bit bucket.
> 
> Could the maintainer of lsml either:
>   - get rid of linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
>   - or forward posts in there to lsml
> 
> That bright idea might save the maintainer time but
> it wastes ours.

I think it's a majordomo feature ... you need misdelivered or
undelivered emails not to come back to the list, so the return-path: is
set to the owner list (so they can be removed from the email list).

In theory, a mailer should never reply to the return path, so how are
you getting this in your reply path?

James

Re: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org is a pain

[Matti Aarnio]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:16:15AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 17:10 -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> > Seems I'm not the only one sending posts to the
> > linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org bit bucket.
> > 
> > Could the maintainer of lsml either:
> >   - get rid of linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
> >   - or forward posts in there to lsml
> > 
> > That bright idea might save the maintainer time but
> > it wastes ours.
> 
> I think it's a majordomo feature ... you need misdelivered or
> undelivered emails not to come back to the list, so the return-path: is
> set to the owner list (so they can be removed from the email list).
> 
> In theory, a mailer should never reply to the return path, so how are
> you getting this in your reply path?
> 
> James

No,  linux-scsi -list does not set that as "Reply-To:"

That behaviour is seen commonly in LAN "email" systems, which
are unable to differentiate information carried in SMTP level
transport vs. what is in the visible headers.

I let you figure out yourself whose email server "product" should
not be connected into the Internet because it is unable to handle
these fundamental differentiations in the internet email..

  /Matti Aarnio