* Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
@ 2001-05-03 16:13 Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 16:04 ` Paul Jarc
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-03 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
Is anyone opposing the following patch?
2001-05-03 Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
* message.el (message-dont-reply-to-names): Fix documentation.
(message-get-reply-headers): Use Mail-Followup-To only for wide
replies.
Index: message.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/gnus/lisp/message.el,v
retrieving revision 6.77
diff -u -r6.77 message.el
--- message.el 2001/04/12 23:14:50 6.77
+++ message.el 2001/05/03 15:54:50
@@ -714,8 +714,8 @@
(defcustom message-dont-reply-to-names
(and (boundp 'rmail-dont-reply-to-names) rmail-dont-reply-to-names)
- "*A regexp specifying names to prune when doing wide replies.
-A value of nil means exclude your own name only."
+ "*A regexp specifying addresses to prune when doing wide replies.
+A value of nil means exclude your own user name only."
:version "21.1"
:group 'message
:type '(choice (const :tag "Yourself" nil)
@@ -3980,6 +3980,7 @@
(message-set-work-buffer)
(if (and mft
message-use-followup-to
+ wide
(or (not (eq message-use-followup-to 'ask))
(message-y-or-n-p
(concat "Obey Mail-Followup-To? ") t "\
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:13 Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful Florian Weimer
@ 2001-05-03 16:04 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> Is anyone opposing the following patch?
>
> 2001-05-03 Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
>
> * message.el (message-dont-reply-to-names): Fix documentation.
> (message-get-reply-headers): Use Mail-Followup-To only for wide
> replies.
I noticed that, and had been meaning to get around to this myself.
Mail-Followup-To should indeed be used only for wide replies.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:13 Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 16:04 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
2001-05-03 16:10 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:29 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Alan Shutko @ 2001-05-03 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> Is anyone opposing the following patch?
>
> 2001-05-03 Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
>
> * message.el (message-dont-reply-to-names): Fix documentation.
> (message-get-reply-headers): Use Mail-Followup-To only for wide
> replies.
Would that mean that I'd have to stop using F in mailing lists and
switch to S W all the time? Currently, Mail-Followup-To works with
followups....
--
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
Man and wife make one fool.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
@ 2001-05-03 16:10 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:29 ` Florian Weimer
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> writes:
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> > Is anyone opposing the following patch?
> >
> > 2001-05-03 Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
> >
> > * message.el (message-dont-reply-to-names): Fix documentation.
> > (message-get-reply-headers): Use Mail-Followup-To only for wide
> > replies.
>
> Would that mean that I'd have to stop using F in mailing lists and
> switch to S W all the time? Currently, Mail-Followup-To works with
> followups....
I don't think so. A followup is wide, AIUI. Mail-Followup-To just
shouldn't be used for "R", as it is now.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
2001-05-03 16:10 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-03 16:29 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 17:03 ` Kai Großjohann
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-03 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> writes:
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
>
> > Is anyone opposing the following patch?
> >
> > 2001-05-03 Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
> >
> > * message.el (message-dont-reply-to-names): Fix documentation.
> > (message-get-reply-headers): Use Mail-Followup-To only for wide
> > replies.
>
> Would that mean that I'd have to stop using F in mailing lists and
> switch to S W all the time? Currently, Mail-Followup-To works with
> followups....
Followups are wide replies, at least in some sense (news vs. mail).
Does this answer your question?
(However, I've noticed that the Mail-Followup-To: header is rapidly
becoming less and less useful.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:29 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2001-05-03 17:03 ` Kai Großjohann
2001-05-03 17:47 ` Florian Weimer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Kai Großjohann @ 2001-05-03 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: ding
On 03 May 2001, Florian Weimer wrote:
> (However, I've noticed that the Mail-Followup-To: header is rapidly
> becoming less and less useful.)
Why?
kai
--
The passive voice should never be used.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 17:03 ` Kai Großjohann
@ 2001-05-03 17:47 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 17:41 ` Paul Jarc
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-03 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
> On 03 May 2001, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> > (However, I've noticed that the Mail-Followup-To: header is rapidly
> > becoming less and less useful.)
>
> Why?
For mailing lists, I think Mail-Copies-To: should point to the mailing
list submission address. However, some commonly used software
accumulates the addresses of earlier contributors in the same thread
in the Mail-Copies-To: header, making it a duplicate of the To: and
Cc: headers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 17:47 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2001-05-03 17:41 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:14 ` Florian Weimer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> > > (However, I've noticed that the Mail-Followup-To: header is rapidly
> > > becoming less and less useful.)
Have you read <URL:http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html>? I don't know
of any other header field, or set of fields, that llows the same
expressive power as Mail-Followup-To, if properly supported.
> For mailing lists, I think Mail-Copies-To: should point to the mailing
> list submission address.
Do you think it should be set by the list, or by posters? How would a
poster express "I don't want to receive copies of followups", or "I do
want ..." or "I want to receive copies of *all followups in this
thread*, not just followups to this message"? Mail-Followup-To, if
honored and preserved by other posters' software, allows all these
expressions.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 17:41 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-03 19:14 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 19:16 ` Paul Jarc
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-03 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> > > > (However, I've noticed that the Mail-Followup-To: header is rapidly
> > > > becoming less and less useful.)
>
> Have you read <URL:http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html>? I don't know
> of any other header field, or set of fields, that llows the same
> expressive power as Mail-Followup-To, if properly supported.
I don't think it works. Has DJB written a real specification?
> > For mailing lists, I think Mail-Copies-To: should point to the mailing
> > list submission address.
>
> Do you think it should be set by the list, or by posters?
I'm not sure, I guess it doesn't work well either way.
Why didn't my message carry a Mail-Followup-To header, but yours did?
This is really strange.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:14 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2001-05-03 19:16 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-04 12:38 ` Josh Huber
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
> > Have you read <URL:http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html>? I don't know
> > of any other header field, or set of fields, that llows the same
> > expressive power as Mail-Followup-To, if properly supported.
>
> I don't think it works. Has DJB written a real specification?
What's unreal about replyto.html? How does the behavior it recommends
fail?
> Why didn't my message carry a Mail-Followup-To header, but yours did?
Gnus doesn't generate MFT (yet, anyway). Mine are generated by
qmail-inject.
When creating a message buffer for a new message, there should be no
automatically-generated MFT field. Upon sending a message in a
mailing-list group (detected by to-list or to-address group
parameters, or something), Gnus ought to check for MFT supplied by the
user, and if there is none, add one containing all the addresses from
To+Cc. It'd also be nice to copy Reply-To/From to Mail-Reply-To when
broken-reply-to is set.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:16 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-04 12:38 ` Josh Huber
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Josh Huber @ 2001-05-04 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
> When creating a message buffer for a new message, there should be no
> automatically-generated MFT field. Upon sending a message in a
> mailing-list group (detected by to-list or to-address group
> parameters, or something), Gnus ought to check for MFT supplied by the
> user, and if there is none, add one containing all the addresses from
> To+Cc. It'd also be nice to copy Reply-To/From to Mail-Reply-To when
> broken-reply-to is set.
This would be very nice. This is the only thing I've missed coming
from mutt.
--
Josh Huber
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 16:13 Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 16:04 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
@ 2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
2001-05-03 19:08 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jason R. Mastaler @ 2001-05-03 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
--
(TMDA - http://tmda.sourceforge.net/)
(OSI-certified SPAM reduction system)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
@ 2001-05-03 19:08 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:22 ` ShengHuo ZHU
2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Jason R. Mastaler" <jason-dated-989607510.ef865c@mastaler.com> writes:
> Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
> honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
> currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
Yes. Currently it depends on gnus-use-followup-to. MFT ought to have
its own variable with obey-by-default, but I've never gotten around to
doing that. Apparently no one else has yet either. I think a good
deault behavior would be to obey if the MFT address list is the same
as either To+Cc or To+Cc+(Mail-Reply-To/Reply-To/From), and prompt
otherwise. Comparing lists of addresses would be a bit tedious,
though.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:08 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-03 19:22 ` ShengHuo ZHU
2001-05-03 19:26 ` Paul Jarc
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: ShengHuo ZHU @ 2001-05-03 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
> "Jason R. Mastaler" <jason-dated-989607510.ef865c@mastaler.com> writes:
> > Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
> > honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
> > currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
>
> Yes. Currently it depends on gnus-use-followup-to.
A correction. It is message-use-followup-to.
> MFT ought to have its own variable with obey-by-default, but I've
> never gotten around to doing that. Apparently no one else has yet
> either. I think a good deault behavior would be to obey if the MFT
> address list is the same as either To+Cc or
> To+Cc+(Mail-Reply-To/Reply-To/From), and prompt otherwise.
> Comparing lists of addresses would be a bit tedious, though.
I think the default value should be `use' or `t', instead of `ask'.
If no objection, I'll change it to `use'.
ShengHuo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:22 ` ShengHuo ZHU
@ 2001-05-03 19:26 ` Paul Jarc
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
> > Yes. Currently it depends on gnus-use-followup-to.
>
> A correction. It is message-use-followup-to.
Oops, right.
> I think the default value should be `use' or `t', instead of `ask'.
> If no objection, I'll change it to `use'.
Do you mean changing the default of message-use-followup-to, or
introducing a new variable with that default? What would be the
behavior for t, since "poster" doesn't mean anything with MFT?
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
2001-05-03 19:08 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 19:20 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-05 14:38 ` Per Abrahamsen
1 sibling, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-03 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Jason R. Mastaler" <jason-dated-989607510.ef865c@mastaler.com> writes:
> Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
> honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
> currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
The current behavior is analogous to the treatment of the Followup-To
header. In fact, it is controlled by the same variable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2001-05-03 19:20 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-05 14:38 ` Per Abrahamsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jarc @ 2001-05-03 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> "Jason R. Mastaler" <jason-dated-989607510.ef865c@mastaler.com> writes:
> > Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
> > honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
> > currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
>
> The current behavior is analogous to the treatment of the Followup-To
> header. In fact, it is controlled by the same variable.
Yes, but that was just a kludge. It was "good enough" when I first
wrote the MFT stuff, and I just haven't gotten back to it.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful
2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 19:20 ` Paul Jarc
@ 2001-05-05 14:38 ` Per Abrahamsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Per Abrahamsen @ 2001-05-05 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> "Jason R. Mastaler" <jason-dated-989607510.ef865c@mastaler.com> writes:
>
> > Another thought about Mail-Followup-To: -- shouldn't the default be to
> > honor Mail-Followup-To instead of prompting the user as is the case
> > currently? Mail-Copies-To is automatically honored by Gnus.
>
> The current behavior is analogous to the treatment of the Followup-To
> header. In fact, it is controlled by the same variable.
But I'd like two different variables. There is a lot more jokesters
on Usenet who think FUT'ing to strange groups is fun.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-05-05 14:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-05-03 16:13 Mail-Followup-To not only for wide replies considered harmful Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 16:04 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:07 ` Alan Shutko
2001-05-03 16:10 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 16:29 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 17:03 ` Kai Großjohann
2001-05-03 17:47 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 17:41 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:14 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 19:16 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-04 12:38 ` Josh Huber
2001-05-03 18:58 ` Jason R. Mastaler
2001-05-03 19:08 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:22 ` ShengHuo ZHU
2001-05-03 19:26 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-03 19:31 ` Florian Weimer
2001-05-03 19:20 ` Paul Jarc
2001-05-05 14:38 ` Per Abrahamsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).