commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eitan Adler <li...@eitanadler.com>
Subject Re: Reply-To settings (was: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list)
Date Tue, 12 Feb 2019 16:40:29 GMT
(please make sure to add me to the CC as the mailing list is presently broken)
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 07:08, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 12:33, Gilles Sadowski <gilleseran@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 11:16, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski <gilleseran@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> a écrit
:
> > > > >
> > > > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either
> > > > > to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and
> > > > > notifications@
> > > >
> > > > I had a look at that too.
> > > > But IMO
> > > >  * "dev" and
> > > >  * "commits", "notifications", ...
> > > > are different cases in that the former relays messages that originated
> > > > from real people while the latter comes from a "bot" and it would make
> > > > no sense to reply to it.
> > >
> > > Yes. That's deliberate, for the reason you state.
> > > The point is that all the lists have Reply-To set.
> >
> > Sorry, I don't follow the reasoning; why should the setting be
> > the same for two different cases?
>
> Huh?
>
> The setting is not the same.
>
> They all have Reply-To set, however as I wrote, the actual setting is
> not the same for all the cases.

There are two different things:
- having reply-to set
- having reply-to munged

The former happens by the user. The latter is changed by the mailing
list.  The right thing to do for commits@ is to have the *bot itself*
set "reply-to" to the list and for the list to do nothing.


On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 13:19, Gilles Sadowski <gilleseran@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A message intended for the list that
> is sent privately, or one intended to be private that is sent to a public
> list?]

Not exactly. In the broken case, public messages also run the risk of
getting ignored. This is because replies don't go to the user and thus
look like ordinary messages. As an example: I get an average of 200
messages per day from public mailing lists. Unless a message is marked
as "to me" or "I participated" it is much more likely to be missed.

The tradeoffs are:

Non-broken Pros:
- Doesn't break the expectation of "reply" vs "reply all"
- Private messages are not likely to go a public mailing list
- No need to manually add people to CC
- Messages are less likely to be lost to the author
- Following internet standards
- Similar to other open source projects

Cons:
- Its possible to accidentally sent a private reply which will need to
be redirected to the mailing list.


Broken Pros:
- It takes slightly more work to send a private reply which will need
to be redirected to the mailing list.



-- 
Eitan Adler

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message