On 2018-11-21 07:52:19 -0800 (-0800), Morgan Fainberg wrote:
The issue is a few very popular web clients (maybe one that I use) and some mobile mail apps do not have clear implementations of this feature. Until we have an explicit reply-to, I have to modify every single email I am sending to openstack-discuss so it doesn't also send directly (in this case to you) to the sender as well as the OpenStack-Discuss list.
Yes, if RFC 2369 parsing support is lacking, it's a good opportunity to encourage those services to add it. The client in question also seems to encourage you to top-post, not trim quoted material, and include an unnecessary HTML copy (thankfully it doesn't seem to call remote sites so they can track anyone who reads it without appropriate precautions in their browser). Doesn't seem to me to be a particularly effective platform for participating in technical mailing lists.
Reply-to-all also doesn't solve this problem, as it (in this case) would add you and openstack-discuss. I agree with Chris on this point. However, as long as we're planning on fixing the reply-to bits for openstack-discuss I'll weather the transitional period. [...]
Well, I'm not sure what plan you're thinking is going to "fix" this. We need to avoid adding/modifying Reply-To headers as they are likely to be covered in DKIM signatures. I haven't performed a comprehensive analysis of DKIM-Signature headers found in our archives to determine how many (if any) include Reply-To in their "h" list, but I find plenty of examples on the Internet of MTA configurations doing that so I expect it's a relatively common choice. Also, note that this is a behavior change from the openstack-dev and openstack-sigs MLs (they had reply_goes_to_list=1 set) but not for the openstack and openstack-operators MLs (where it was already reply_goes_to_list=0 instead). -- Jeremy Stanley