[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Submitter Email?

From: Bob Proulx
Subject: Re: Submitter Email?
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:58:55 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

Glenn Morris wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> >> The MFT header is added to the cc to the bug-list that goes out when a
> >> report is closed by sending a mail to 123-done. It is not added to
> >> any-and-all mails, because there is no need.
> >
> > I disagree.  The MFT header is needed in both cases.
> I disagree with your disagreement. :)

I agree.  :-)  (Because if I disagreed to your disagreement it would
mean I agreed.  Too many double negatives. :-)

> Just follow the normal GNU mailing list conventions of using
> reply-to-all, and everything will be fine. The addition of
> into the system does not change anything.

Remember that the Mail-Followup-To header isn't really for the sender.
It is really for the recipient to help their mailer follow up back to
the right place.  Doing a reply-all isn't the right thing for people
in that case.  It produces an inferior result that we, I anyway,
simply tolerate.  Because even though email is old and simple most
people today have little understanding of it and very poor etiquette
in its use.

> The MFT is only needed with the -done messages that close bugs, because
> they mess around with the recipients.

It is certainly helpful there.  It would also be helpful with normal
messages too.

> You're effectively saying "all mail should set MFT", which
> is not something I agree with. There's no point setting an MFT that just
> points to all the recipients.

No, I wasn't arguing for all lists.  (Although that would be a
different topic.)  I was only talking about BTS email.  Because the
desired recipient list isn't a single mailing list.  Every message has
a different recipient address with a unique bug number.  That makes it
somewhat special.

> > Please may I request a MFT header be added to messages sent to the GNU
> > BTS as an enhancement request?
> Sorry, I'm not going to do that.
> Everyone should just follow the normal convention of not
> assuming people are subscribed, and use reply-to-all, and everything
> works fine.

I think we can only agree to disagree.  I will do something locally to
automatically produce an MFT header on my outgoing BTS messages
similar to normal mailing list messages.

I just wish people would practice better email skills.  I know.
"Taint ever going to happen."  But I can wish for it.

> (And let's face it, MFT isn't a magic bullet; and the people who reply
> to me off-list by mistake are always using dumb mail clients that don't
> respect it anyway.)

Nope.  And I can't even say it was better in the old days.  As I
remember things people have never been good at email.  :-(

Thanks for discussing the issue.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]