From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261228AbVFALJZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:09:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261245AbVFALJZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:09:25 -0400 Received: from krusty.dt.E-Technik.Uni-Dortmund.DE ([129.217.163.1]:48286 "EHLO mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261228AbVFALJX (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:09:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 13:09:19 +0200 From: Matthias Andree To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] mailing list management Message-ID: <20050601110919.GA18416@merlin.emma.line.org> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <429D8A3A.8000304@poczta.fm> <429D93B8.4060503@poczta.fm> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <429D93B8.4060503@poczta.fm> X-PGP-Key: http://home.pages.de/~mandree/keys/GPGKEY.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 01 Jun 2005, Lukasz Stelmach wrote: > >>I suggest > >>(re)placing any Reply-To headers in incoming letters with Reply-To: > >>linux-kernel@... before delivering them to subscribers. > > > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > That is quite a biased view due to a disaster the author mentions at the > end. Yes, I must admit that there are some points he *might* be right. > Nonetheles I wouldn't concider the drawbacks harmful in case of LKML. Redirecting discussions to the list that are better left outside, the incapability of other mailers to reply directly if Reply-To is set, are important points. -- Matthias Andree