Re: mail-{followup,copies}-to on this list

[NAGY Andras <nagya@inf.elte.hu>]

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> >   If the header is not present the agent SHOULD NOT set the message
> >   to be both posted and mailed.
> > 
> > Please correct me if I interpret this wrong, or stop sending me
> > personal followups.
> 
> This message is not posted, only mailed.  So technically, this is
> okay.

In the context of a mailing list, `post' means mail to the list, and
`mail' means private mail, semantically, regardless the actual
technical transport.

> Also, following your interpretation would mean that the MCT/MFT
> proposal would change what happens to a message which does NOT contain
> these headers.  But surely, in the interest of backward compatibility,
> the proposal for a new header should specify that the old behavior is
> used in case the header is not present.

I think most people except public responses (followups) to the mailing
list.  This is also the case when they do not set a MCT/MFT header.
(Perhaps because they don't know about it.)

The common practice on all the mailing lists I know is to send
followups to the list by default.  (This is also what broken list
servers suggest when adding an In-Reply-To header pointing to the
list.)

So, sending a private followup by default is not what most users
except, therefore this interpretation breaks backward compatibility.

> Is it so difficult for you to include the MCT/MFT headers?

Of course not (just looking for some mixture of posting styles and
group parameters).


Andras