|Subject:||RE: Reply to header|
|Date:||Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:13:24 +0100|
From: address@hidden:address@hidden on behalf of Buddy Burden[SMTP:address@hidden
Sent: 2. november 2004 20:00
Subject: Re: Reply to header
Well, I'm glad I finally got to read that. I've always wondered why
people were so rabid about this issue. Let's see what points this
fellow makes ...
The Principle of Minimal Munging: Geez, how old is this article? I can
hardly consider using a reply-to header "munging".
It Adds Nothing: Completely ignores the entire point, which is that
yes, there is a way to reply to the author only, and yes, there is a way
to reply to both the author and the list (which is _completely_ useless,
since it double-replies), but there is no way to reply to only the list.
Double replies occur only, if the author is a subscriber.
So on lists, where anyone can post ( like LKML ) , Reply-To:
would be bad ( becuase the original author would not get a reply,
unless you add him manually ).
On lists, where only subscribers can post, Reply-To: might be good.
I personally am against Reply-To, but that is my personal opinion ;-)
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|