Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 19:03:23 +0200 From: Gerhard Sittig <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net> To: "'freebsd-stable@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: OT Reply-To munging (was: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD) Message-ID: <20010628190323.J17514@speedy.gsinet> In-Reply-To: <004a01c0ff81$3a3093a0$0408a8c0@kiste>; from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 05:20:00AM %2B0200 References: <01C0FEFE.8EB2BA80.wmoran@iowna.com> <01062713134503.00453@mukappa.home.com> <20010627230347.I17514@speedy.gsinet> <004a01c0ff81$3a3093a0$0408a8c0@kiste>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I do write this to the public since I feel the topic to be
relevant for the operation of the list -- and some people still
don't get that the mangling is doing harm ... :<
BTW the lates thread about it has happened only some six weeks
ago and contains the <20010514192511.U253@speedy.gsinet> message
with many links to both sides of the discussion:
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:25:11 +0200
From: Gerhard Sittig <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net>
To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: OT Reply-To: (was: Multiple copies)
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 05:20 +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>
> "Gerhard Sittig" <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 13:13 -0600, Mike Porter wrote:
> > >
> > > If the majordomo config file for the list included the line
> > > "reply-to: stable@freebsd.org" [ ... ]
> >
> > Argh, nooooo! Not again, please! [ ... ]
>
> And read
> http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml , too.
> Those two documents should make it very clear, that the whole
> thing is a typical nonsense religious war, with the only
> possible conclusion being "I am not the listowner. I can do
> nothing about it but hit the correct key/button in my mailer &
> shut up".
Hmm, I still don't see how *breaking* legitimate user requests
(i.e. setting Reply-To to something the article's _author_
intends to look like) can be a good idea.
It's as simple as this: The Reply-To: field is a user owned
field. Period. Any list admin touching this fields should be
taken out and shot. Immediately. Or slapped into the face until
he's laughing. To continue slapping since he's laughing ...
How would you like a mailing list software mangle your From:,
Date: or Organisation: fields? It's already a PITA with all
those braindead Subject: mangling. :( And I suppose those to
wish for a dummy approved Reply-To: have never suffered from one
of the accidents this scenario encourages and escalates.
For those thinking that Reply-To: mangling would be a good idea
since "it adds functionality" -- *please* think again and think
hard! Doing damage to essential data (the destination of
replies) cannot really be considered adding features. It
definitely is breakage.
I guess the most confusion about the topic comes from the
inability to tell _adding_ from _munging_ -- please read again
both sides of the discussion and you suddenly see that they both
state the same: It would be nice to have something idiot proof.
While those thinking for two more seconds come to the conclusion
that *munging* data is not appropriate and breaks functionality.
While *adding* a Reply-To: pointing to the list -- in case there
is no such field in the original message -- is violating POLA and
breaks the principle of reliable and surpriseless operation. And
eyeballing every message before replying where the Reply-To:
points to cannot be considered minimal work either. Hmmm ...
There's no substitute for a brain and cleanly designed software.
And there's no advantage in providing idiot proof solutions for
those incapable of thinking. Yes, I feel the wish for the above
mangling can only stem from not knowing better, since there's no
real "I need this for proper operation" but only a "I would like
to have it since my mailer is dumb assed".
virtually yours 82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4 61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig true | mail -s "get gpg key" Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net
--
If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
ask your parents or an adult to help you.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010628190323.J17514>