[discuss] news.openoffice.org?
Dietrich Schulten
whatever happened to the project to feed the mailing lists into a news
server?
It's been almost half a year since I've been told it was underway.
Cheers,
Dietrich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-u...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: discus...@openoffice.org
The D.h7
> Hi,
> whatever happened to the project to feed the mailing lists into a news
> server?
> It's been almost half a year since I've been told it was underway.
I guess, it's gone... :-(
--
---------------------------
*]* no time, no sign said:
\-/ The D.h7
michelle milledge
Someone from Collab will get back to you on this. This is not a dead
issue! It's just a complicated one.
How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
Michelle
Dietrich Schulten wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> whatever happened to the project to feed the mailing lists into a news
> server?
> It's been almost half a year since I've been told it was underway.
>
> Cheers,
> Dietrich
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-u...@openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: discus...@openoffice.org
--
Thanks,
Michelle
________
Michelle Milledge
OpenOffice.org Source Project
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
michelle...@eng.sun.com
Guy Capra
> Message précédent >
> Le 11/05/2001, à 01:53:13,
> au sujet de : "Re: [discuss] news.openoffice.org?",
> michelle milledge <michelle...@Sun.COM> a écrit :
[.../...]
> How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
It is a list bot configuration behavior, not mailer's one.
Hoping this help,
--
Guy Capra, Alomphega.
www.StarOffice-fr.com
www.OpenOffice-fr.org
_________________________________________
Seul ceux qui sont assez fous pour croire
pouvoir changer le monde... Y parviennent
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Eike Rathke
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 08:38:07 +0000, Guy Capra wrote:
> > How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
>
> Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
Not true, _both_ Reply-To headers were set, to the list and to Michelle.
The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
Eike
--
PGP key 0xDA620A55: 01 53 0B 6F E3 37 08 47 E2 A0 6A 63 C1 3E 8B 96
Guy Capra
> Message précédent >
> Le 12/05/2001, à 20:08:45,
> au sujet de : "Re: [discuss] news.openoffice.org?",
> Eike Rathke <e...@erack.de> a écrit :
>
> Hi Guy,
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 08:38:07 +0000, Guy Capra wrote:
>
> > > How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
> >
> > Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
>
> Not true,
Sorry Eike : true. When you use a standard mailer to reply to the sender
(not to all), just Michelle mail is set.
> _both_ Reply-To headers were set, to the list and to Michelle.
Only if you 'reply to all', and this is not intuitive reply in most
mailers. The number of mistake here prove this if it is needed.
> The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
That's exactly what it is bad : the list must *replace* the sender
reply-to field. As this, even with a bad reply, the reply go to the list.
Simple.
Hoping this help,
--
Guy Capra, Alomphega.
www.StarOffice-fr.com
www.OpenOffice-fr.org
_________________________________________
Seul ceux qui sont assez fous pour croire
pouvoir changer le monde... Y parviennent
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Eike Rathke
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 17:21:00 +0000, Guy Capra wrote:
> > > > How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
> > >
> > > Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
> >
> > Not true,
>
> Sorry Eike : true. When you use a standard mailer to reply to the sender
> (not to all), just Michelle mail is set.
That's just what I was talking of when I wrote:
> > The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> > depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
It just depends whether the mailer program uses the first or the second
occurence of the Reply-To header. So it's a completely unpredictable
behavior.
> > _both_ Reply-To headers were set, to the list and to Michelle.
>
> Only if you 'reply to all', and this is not intuitive reply in most
> mailers. The number of mistake here prove this if it is needed.
A reply to all in this case is almost never what you want on a mailing
list, since that would mail copies to the list _and_ to the original
sender.
> > The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> > depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
>
> That's exactly what it is bad : the list must *replace* the sender
> reply-to field. As this, even with a bad reply, the reply go to the list.
> Simple.
You're right for practical reasons because most mailer agents just don't
know how to handle mailing lists.
In other (more theoretical) means it's not that simple. The original
purpose of a Reply-To header is to provide an address for the case that
a direct personal reply shall be addressed to the author of a mail (or a
representative), and the From address should not be used. The Reply-To
address may be completely different from the original From address for
reasons only known to the author, maybe because she wants to separate
mail this way. So if an existent Reply-To header is substituted with an
address of the mailing list, that information is lost. Needless to say
that very often Reply-To headers, as they are used, are redundant
because they just contain exactly the same address as the From header.
Other problems with the Reply-To inserted by the mailing list are
crosspostings to multiple lists. Each Reply-To inserted points only to
the current list, so replies are scattered over all lists, just
depending on who read the mail where and replied to it.
I wish more mail user agents would be able to handle mailing lists
properly (list replies are addressed to To header contents matching
subscribed mailing lists) and would also respect a Mail-Followup-To
header..
Oh yes, and of course newsgroups don't suffer from all these problems ;-)
Hope I shed some light on this.
Eike
--
PGP key 0xDA620A55: 01 53 0B 6F E3 37 08 47 E2 A0 6A 63 C1 3E 8B 96
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy Capra
> Message précédent >
> Le 13/05/2001, à 21:41:16,
> au sujet de : "Re: [discuss] news.openoffice.org?",
> Eike Rathke <e...@erack.de> a écrit :
>
> Hi Guy,
>
> On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 17:21:00 +0000, Guy Capra wrote:
>
> > > > > How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
> > >
> > > Not true,
> >
> > Sorry Eike : true. When you use a standard mailer to reply to the sender
> > (not to all), just Michelle mail is set.
>
> That's just what I was talking of when I wrote:
>
> > > The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> > > depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
>
> It just depends whether the mailer program uses the first or the second
> occurence of the Reply-To header. So it's a completely unpredictable
> behavior.
So because it is unpredictable, we must take that in consideration...
> > > _both_ Reply-To headers were set, to the list and to Michelle.
> >
> > Only if you 'reply to all', and this is not intuitive reply in most
> > mailers. The number of mistake here prove this if it is needed.
>
> A reply to all in this case is almost never what you want on a mailing
> list, since that would mail copies to the list _and_ to the original
> sender.
No. The 'netiquette' is clear about that : we have to send to the list,
and ***only if the sender ask for*** to the sender.
Many people don't want mails double...
And plus, many people don't do a 'reply to all' just because it is not an
intuitive reply...
> > > The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> > > depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
> >
> > That's exactly what it is bad : the list must *replace* the sender
> > reply-to field. As this, even with a bad reply, the reply go to the list.
> > Simple.
>
> You're right for practical reasons because most mailer agents just don't
> know how to handle mailing lists.
Yes.
> In other (more theoretical) means it's not that simple. The original
> purpose of a Reply-To header is to provide an address for the case that
> a direct personal reply shall be addressed to the author of a mail (or a
> representative), and the From address should not be used. The Reply-To
> address may be completely different from the original From address for
> reasons only known to the author, maybe because she wants to separate
> mail this way. So if an existent Reply-To header is substituted with an
> address of the mailing list, that information is lost. Needless to say
> that very often Reply-To headers, as they are used, are redundant
> because they just contain exactly the same address as the From header.
So many list bots handle that well... Look at 'Sympa' or best,
"Listar"... Look at old "eGroups" (now Yahoogroups), or MS ListBot...
> Other problems with the Reply-To inserted by the mailing list are
> crosspostings to multiple lists. Each Reply-To inserted points only to
> the current list, so replies are scattered over all lists, just
> depending on who read the mail where and replied to it.
Crossposting must be stopped !
> I wish more mail user agents would be able to handle mailing lists
> properly (list replies are addressed to To header contents matching
> subscribed mailing lists) and would also respect a Mail-Followup-To
> header..
Yes, I wish too... But we have to do with the existent...
> Oh yes, and of course newsgroups don't suffer from all these problems ;-)
Yes, but ng have others... The first is IMHO easier SPAM capabilities...
> Hope I shed some light on this.
Yes, thank you.
Regards,
--
Guy Capra, Alomphega.
www.StarOffice-fr.com
www.OpenOffice-fr.org
_________________________________________
Seul ceux qui sont assez fous pour croire
pouvoir changer le monde... Y parviennent
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The D.h7
field for a while. I'm quite unsure with the impression I've got
from the last years. So I try to put it into words here und hope
you will give some feetback.
FromHeader Field and ToHeader Field are checked from lots of SMTP-Servers
to qualify if the Mail, they got, has to be managed by them. Eather, the
sender (from) or the recipient(to) has to be Member of the SMTP-Server-Domain,
or a collection of domains, it is responsible for.
If You post a Message from an Account(Me@work) assoziating an E-Mail Address different from
the E-Mail Address you usually mail from. (Me@Home) You simply fill out the reply-to HeaderField.
With your (Me@Collector)-Address and from there all your Mails can be routed as you wish.)
Means:
The Reply-HeaderField is some additional Address that(if it is set), overrides the
From-HeaderInformation.
If We Post Messages to Mailinglists, the Main-Return-Address Should be The MailingList.
Means, All MessageReplys return to this List. This means, The MailingList Address has to
be the first ReplyTo-Header-Field.
If We Post a Message to this List, the ListBot has to determine the returnAddress of the
Sender. Means, FromHeader-Content if ReplyTo-Header field is empty and
means ReplyTo-Header field, if it has a value.
This Would Solve the following problems:
1.) E-Mail clients would reply to The MailingList instead of Replying to Sender and Mailinglist
2.) The enoying T-Online-Ag-Mailserver, that corrupts the From-Header field can be undergone,
by simply setting the ReplyTo-EmailAddress again.
I can't see any new Problems with this idea. And I would like to see, if the ListBot behavior
would be changed a bit that Way I've tryed to explain here.
Best regards
The D.h7
Guy Capra wrote:
>
> Bonjour,
>
> > Message précédent >
> > Le 12/05/2001, à 20:08:45,
> > au sujet de : "Re: [discuss] news.openoffice.org?",
> > Eike Rathke <e...@erack.de> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi Guy,
> >
> > On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 08:38:07 +0000, Guy Capra wrote:
> >
> > > > How's my reply-to? Just switched to Netscape mail...
> > >
> > > Sorry, not good : always the same reply to only you, Michelle...
> >
> > Not true,
>
> Sorry Eike : true. When you use a standard mailer to reply to the sender
> (not to all), just Michelle mail is set.
>
> > _both_ Reply-To headers were set, to the list and to Michelle.
>
> Only if you 'reply to all', and this is not intuitive reply in most
> mailers. The number of mistake here prove this if it is needed.
>
> > The list inserts it's own Reply-To even if one already exists, it
> > depends on the reader's agent which one it takes.
>
> That's exactly what it is bad : the list must *replace* the sender
> reply-to field. As this, even with a bad reply, the reply go to the list.
> Simple.
>
> Hoping this help,
> --
> Guy Capra, Alomphega.
>
> www.StarOffice-fr.com
> www.OpenOffice-fr.org
> _________________________________________
> Seul ceux qui sont assez fous pour croire
> pouvoir changer le monde... Y parviennent
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-u...@openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: discus...@openoffice.org
--
---------------------------
*]* no time, no sign said:
\-/ The D.h7
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy Capra
You're exactly right, and it is what I said in other less technical
words.
note : all other list bots work as this...
Thank you for your clarification.
Regards,
--
Guy Capra, Alomphega.
www.StarOffice-fr.com
www.OpenOffice-fr.org
_________________________________________
Seul ceux qui sont assez fous pour croire
pouvoir changer le monde... Y parviennent
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> Message précédent >
> Le 16/05/2001, à 14:32:24,
> au sujet de : "Re: [discuss] news.openoffice.org?",
> "The D.h7" <FalkS...@gmx.de> a écrit :
[.../...]
[.../...]
Eike Rathke
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 05:32:24 -0700, The D.h7 wrote:
> FromHeader Field and ToHeader Field are checked from lots of SMTP-Servers
> to qualify if the Mail, they got, has to be managed by them. Eather, the
> sender (from) or the recipient(to) has to be Member of the SMTP-Server-Domain,
> or a collection of domains, it is responsible for.
You're mixing something up here. The From and To headers as you see them
in your mail client have nothing to do with the SMTP envelope MAIL FROM
and RCPT TO headers, though most times (in "normal" life) they are
identical if you send a mail. Think of your mail's From and To headers
as being written on the letter itself, and the SMTP envelope headers
being, well, written on an envelope ;) The only thing what really
counts are the envelope headers, they are what the mail transport agent
(MTA) looks at for delivery. In fact, if you write to a mailing list,
the listbot puts your letter into a new envelope with new MAIL FROM and
RCPT TO headers for each of the recipients subscribed, while your From
and To headers of the mail are not touched at all.
Eike
--
Eike Rathke, Software Engineer, OpenOffice.org Calc core developer
PGP key 0xDA620A55: 01 53 0B 6F E3 37 08 47 E2 A0 6A 63 C1 3E 8B 96
.project: reworking some internals
The D.h7
=========================================
Eike Rathke wrote:
> > FromHeader Field and ToHeader Field are checked from lots of SMTP-Servers
> > to qualify if the Mail, they got, has to be managed by them. Eather, the
> > sender (from) or the recipient(to) has to be Member of the SMTP-Server-Domain,
> > or a collection of domains, it is responsible for.
> You're mixing something up here. The From and To headers as you see them
> in your mail client have nothing to do with the SMTP envelope MAIL FROM
> and RCPT TO headers,
As I said, I'm not complete sure with this And You are right, the SMTP-Commands:
rcpt would specify the recipient of the Mail.
mail would specify the sender of the Mail.
> though most times (in "normal" life) they are
> identical if you send a mail.
Can be different from The Content of any Header Field. But usually they are
bound Because MessageUserAgents(MUA) just give the opportunity to enter
From:/ replyTo: and To: Information. And it uses those information to send
SMTP-Commands to the MailServer and it would be some kind of strange me thinks,
if it would change some HeaderInformation and put something different into it
as what we've justed filled in...
Sorry for mixing this, but I think, the main intension got not hurt by this.
> Think of your mail's From and To headers
> as being written on the letter itself, and the SMTP envelope headers
> being, well, written on an envelope ;) The only thing what really
> counts are the envelope headers, they are what the mail transport agent
> (MTA) looks at for delivery. In fact, if you write to a mailing list,
> the listbot puts your letter into a new envelope with new MAIL FROM and
> RCPT TO headers for each of the recipients subscribed, while your From
> and To headers of the mail are not touched at all.
O.K. that's the Way the ListBot works. BUT: Who said, that it works well?
All those complains here should be more than a signal me thinks :-)
Best Regards
PS: Everytime, I find a bug in other programs I think about how to make it better.
But since there are so many things to do I turned to just critique. And try
to give hints for those, being able to fix the problems.
> Eike
>
> --
> Eike Rathke, Software Engineer, OpenOffice.org Calc core developer
> PGP key 0xDA620A55: 01 53 0B 6F E3 37 08 47 E2 A0 6A 63 C1 3E 8B 96
> .project: reworking some internals
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-u...@openoffice.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: discus...@openoffice.org
--
---------------------------
*]* no time, no sign said:
\-/ The D.h7
---------------------------------------------------------------------