[meta] reply to the list

[Jim Graham]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:53:09PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Feb 26 15:27:57, spooky130u at gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 09:41:18PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote:

> > There is a better way (with procmail, at least) that I use, which
> > gets all list e-mail filtered to the mbox I set aside for the list,
> > private responses to me in my own mbox, and replies to the list
> > that are CC'd to me ONLY sent to the list.  I do not use List-
> > headers---as you say, they aren't reliable.
> 
> I use procmail similarly, and the messages can indeed
> be filtered by other ways too ("macports anywhere
> in To: or Cc:"). But isn't one of the purposes of
> the List-* headers to have a definite one line for that?
> What else is List-Id for?

You stated yourself that List-* headers aren't always available, because
some MUAs (mainly mickeysoft crap, as far as I know) don't provide
List-Reply, so they (think they) have to do Group-Reply....  I've seen
this discussion dozens of times in various lists---from people who like
the extra copy and people who hate it.  I don't think this issue is going
away anytime soon, so I chose the amazingly obvious method that works
every time without needing List-* header at all.  I can't force every
user/luser on the planet to switch to MUAs that work (obviously), nor
would I ever consider trying, so I chose to go with the solution that
works every time.  In fact, at the time, I didn't even think about
List-* ... my solution, which took about 0.1 seconds to form in my
mind, was the one I started with from day one.

Later,
   --jim

-- 
THE SCORE:  ME:  2  CANCER:  0
73 DE N5IAL (/4)            MiSTie #49997      < Running Mac OS X Lion >
spooky130u at gmail.com                    ICBM/Hurr.: 30.44406N 86.59909W

   "Now what *you* need is a proper pint of porter poured in a proper
   pewter porter pot.."     --Peter Dalgaard in alt.sysadmin.recovery