My last "contribution", I think.
_Conventions_ (such as top-posting versus inline-replies, or
attachments allowed versus attachments disallowed) do vary
from list to list. _Standards_, such as RFC2822 or MIME,
don't refer to any particular list, but to _all_ email.
We have to hope that the people formulating standards have
thought carefully before finalising those standards, so that
they make sense, and work well. At this point it really has
come to a matter of opinion: some think RFC2822 makes sense
as a standard for email, and others don't.
My belief is that this standard (RFC2822) has been carefully
constructed to reflect what people want, according to
decades of experience, and as such it does make
sense. Indeed, it replaced RFC822 after that no longer
matched what people want.
I think that this crux of this conversation now reduces to:
- Everybody wants it to be easy for a reply to a list
message to go only to the list
- There exist standard headers to facilitate this, which the
list software sets correctly, and which conformant mail
clients interpret correctly. RFC2369 dates from 1998, and
RFC2919 from 2001, so implementors have had a while now to
- Certain commonly used mail clients do not understand those
headers (with one in particular having an open bug with a
known-working patch to add this support!)
- Users of those mail clients which lack support for these
headers wish the list to contravene the standard by
subverting another header, which serves a different purpose,
but which their mail clients do understand, instead of
fixing their mail client or switching to a conformant one,
of which many are available.
My solution: Two opensuse-factory mailing lists, one which
sets Reply-To and the other which doesn't. May the best
approach win ;)