Subject: re: Please, no private mail to me (Dominik Vogt)

From: [email-masked] (Fabien Villard)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:13:25 +0100

>Jason, Dan, does anything on the web page suggest that
>folks should send mail to me? If not, could we mention
>that explicitly (at least for a while)?

	Because I think I'm one of the faulty guys, I can explain. The list put 
your adress in the reply-to field. So to reply there is the lazy way (reply and 
CC to the list) or the boring way (create new message, giving list address, 
subject preferably with RE: before, and importing the mail to repond to in the 
editor). Guess what I often choose ? :-)))
	Ok, I won't in the future, if I have to respond to you.
	Fab.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:20:17 +0100

> 	Ok, I won't in the future, if I have to respond to you.

Ugh, I put a Reply-To address into my mails from home
so nobody tries to reply to my private address.

Jason, can you solve that? I think the Reply-To field
from the lists should always be empty, shouldn't it?

If that is the problem I may have to remove the Reply-To :(

Bye

Dominik
-- 
Dominik Vogt, Hewlett-Packard GmbH, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/14-4596, fax: 07031/14-3883, [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 16 Dec 1998 10:15:23 -0500

%% Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:

  >> Because I think I'm one of the faulty guys, I can explain. The list
  >> put your adress in the reply-to field. So to reply there is the
  >> lazy way (reply and CC to the list) or the boring way (create new
  >> message, giving list address, subject preferably with RE: before,
  >> and importing the mail to repond to in the editor).

  dv> Ugh, I put a Reply-To address into my mails from home
  dv> so nobody tries to reply to my private address.

  dv> Jason, can you solve that? I think the Reply-To field
  dv> from the lists should always be empty, shouldn't it?

No; see my previous URL reference to Reply-To handling and lists.

  dv> If that is the problem I may have to remove the Reply-To :(

I don't understand the problem.

All Reply-To does is redirect mail sent to you to some other address.
If you didn't add a Reply-To, people would _still_ send to your
(original) email address, via the "From" field, if they used reply or
followup.  The former would send only to you, and the latter would send
to both you and the list.

There's no way for _you_ to do anything in your messages which would
remove _you_ as a recipient, except, I guess, for adding something like:

  Reply-To: [email-masked]

which would work.  But then, of course, no one can reply to you
directly; that's a decision you should make yourself.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <[email-masked]>         Network Management Development
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:29:54 +0100

> directly; that's a decision you should make yourself.

Sigh, I feared that. You can probably imagine that I don't
want relies to my private mail be sent to the workers list.

Thanks

Dominik

---

From: Jason L Tibbitts III <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Dec 1998 09:38:34 -0600

>>>>> "DV" == Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:

DV> Jason, can you solve that? I think the Reply-To field from the lists
DV> should always be empty, shouldn't it?

Not if you put one there yourself.  You can set it to the list if you
like.  Mutt can probably insert one conditionally based on where the mail
is going.

Even if this list did have a Reply-To: set, I would not have it override
one that you added yourself.

 - J<

---

From: Jason L Tibbitts III <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Dec 1998 09:51:22 -0600

>>>>> "PDS" == Paul D Smith <[email-masked]> writes:

PDS> All Reply-To does is redirect mail sent to you to some other
PDS> address. If you didn't add a Reply-To, people would _still_ send to
PDS> your (original) email address, via the "From" field, if they used
PDS> reply or followup.  The former would send only to you, and the latter
PDS> would send to both you and the list.

This is, unfortunately, user agent dependent.  Welcome to the hell that
mailing list software authors live in.  You simply cannot control where
replies go, no matter how hard you try.  (For instance, Gnus has the
'broken-reply-to' setting; if a list is broken and sets Reply-To: on every
message then I just turn that on and Gnus pretends it's not there.)

 - J<

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 16 Dec 1998 11:24:02 -0500

dv> Sigh, I feared that. You can probably imagine that I don't
  dv> want relies to my private mail be sent to the workers list.

Sure.  You'd obviously only want to do that if you posted to some
particular addresses, say fvwm-workers.

Using a _good_ mailer, like Emacs VM or Emacs Gnus, you could do this :).
Or, in Emacs, you could define a key to insert that Reply-To for you.
Of course, in that case you've have to remember to do it.

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:31:15 +0100

> Using a _good_ mailer, like Emacs VM or Emacs Gnus, you could do this :).

a) I like mutt's keyboard-only interface, b) emacs is too big for my
machine, c) mutt *can* do it, but I don't like the idea of funblimg
around with its hooks. Same with emcas BTW. I'll probably still do
this if these mails keep coming in.

Bye

Dominik

---

From: Danek Duvall <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:28:13 -0800

On Wed, Dec 16, 1998 at 05:31:15PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:

> a) I like mutt's keyboard-only interface, [...] c) mutt *can* do it, but
> I don't like the idea of funblimg around with its hooks.

send-hook .              "my_hdr Reply-To: [email-masked]"
send-hook "fvwm-workers" "my_hdr Reply-To: [email-masked]"

(You need both to make sure you don't set the Reply-To to fvwm-workers on
all messages.  They also need to be in that order, since all matches are
executed in the order found.)

Anyway, at least you're using mutt.  That makes you one of the Righteous.  ;-)

We could always say that mutt is the official mailer of fvwm and tell
people about the list-reply function.  It's so *very* handy.

Paul, you mentioned that it would be the Right Thing for majordomo to
canonicalize the headers.  Yeah it would be great, since it's the only
thing out there that knows who is and who isn't on the list.  But by the
time the message *gets* to majordomo, it's already been sent to the
individual recipient.  :-(  Majordomo could then *not* send the message to
that one person, but if you filter on the From_ header, you're toast.

Suffice it to say, replying and following up on a mailing list is screwed
up.  :)

Danek

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 16 Dec 1998 12:57:05 -0500

%% Danek Duvall <[email-masked]> writes:

  dd> On Wed, Dec 16, 1998 at 05:31:15PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
  >> a) I like mutt's keyboard-only interface, [...]

Of course Emacs also has a keyboard-only interface.  And since I'm
already running Emacs for editing (etc.) anyway, it doesn't take up any
more room to use it for USENET and mail.

But, I don't want to make this an editor/mailer war :)

  dd> Paul, you mentioned that it would be the Right Thing for majordomo
  dd> to canonicalize the headers.  Yeah it would be great, since it's
  dd> the only thing out there that knows who is and who isn't on the
  dd> list.  But by the time the message *gets* to majordomo, it's
  dd> already been sent to the individual recipient.

Oh.  Yah.  Doh!

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 00:40:38 +0100

> send-hook "fvwm-workers" "my_hdr Reply-To: [email-masked]"

Thanks for the hint, that works well (with a little enhancement to
allow setting Reply-To for the fvwm list too).

>...

You mean there are mailers *without* a list-reply????? Oh, how I
pity their users ;-) I couldn't live without it.

Thanks

Dominik
-- 
Dominik Vogt, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]