On Wed, 9 Dec 1998 skip@calendar.com wrote:
Michael> I would propose to set the mailfield Michael> Reply-To: zope@zope.org Michael> for all articles send via the list verver.
No, no, no, no, no... The failure mode is much worse when the default is to send to the list.
I hate to say "me too", but: ME TOO! Reply-To: munging is evil. I'll share a personal (second-hand) example: On a particular list at a major university, some faculty member announced that he would be taking a leave of absence. Somebody asked, on the list (since Reply-To was set to the list), if that meant he was really leaving or just taking a leave of absence. So he replies, again to the list, it's a leave of absence, but he's not really coming back. Oops. With no Reply-To munging, if you mess up, you can always forward your message to the list. With munging, well, you can't exactly take it back... http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html -- Andy Dustman You should always say "spam" and "eggs" ComStar Communications Corp. instead of "foo" and "bar" (706) 549-7689 | PGP KeyID=0xC72F3F1D in Python examples. (Mark Lutz)