Am 09.11.2012 12:35, schrieb A.L.E.C:
On 11/09/2012 12:16 PM, Michael Heydekamp wrote:
- Click on "Reply to sender": The reply goes to "Ulli.Rainer.Heist@gmx.de"
only (as there is no real name given, this address is obviously taken from the Reply-To: or Mail-Reply-To: header), but not to the list. This behaviour is wrong, IMHO.
Roundcube uses Mail-Reply-To header as Thunderbird does and I think this is ok, because Mail-Reply-To has precedence.
Could you point me to the RFC which does say so? As long as I worked on my own MUA until a few years ago, such Mail-Reply-To: header was AFAIK neither defined nor mentioned in any of the relevant RFCs.
From my point of view "As Thunderbird does" is as a weak argument as "As
Outlook (Express) does" would be.
The RFC standards should take precedence over the proprietary behaviour of which MUA ever.
- Click on "Reply to list or to sender and all recipients": The reply goes
to "users@lists.roundcube.net" only (as there is no real name given, this address might probably be taken from the X-Original-To: header), but not to the sender. This behaviour is wrong again, IMHO.
- Select "Reply all" from the options of the "Reply to list or to sender
and all recipients" button: The reply goes to "Ulli.Rainer.Heist@gmx.de" (obviously taken from the Reply-To: or Mail-Reply-To: header) and in Cc: to "RoundCube Mailingliste users@lists.roundcube.net" (definitely taken from the To: header). This behaviour is more confusing than wrong, anyway it does still not reflect the content of the Reply-To: header and the addresses are taken from different headers.
- Select "Reply list" from the options of the "Reply to list or to sender
and all recipients" button: The reply goes to "users@lists.roundcube.net" only (as there is no real name given, this address might probably be taken from the X-Original-To: header), but not to the sender. This behaviour may be considered as correct, although even this could still be arguable as well. And I'm wondering why the recipient is taken from the X-Original-To: header (rather than from the To: header).
For me it's consistent and Thunderbird does exactly the same.
It's consistent that a) the Reply-To: header is completely ignored in all of these scenarios, b) that the recipient is sometimes taken from the To: header and sometimes from the X-Original-To: header (or a mix of them), and c) that the "Reply all" button does not reply to all?
Hmmm... I'd rather call that confusing. ;-) At least it DID indeed confuse me.
After a quick look it appears to me that this header is supposed to fix mailing list flaws/bugs. These should be fixed at the source (i.e. the mailing list), not by the MUA. Furthermore, the Reply-To: header in question DOES also contain the mailing list address, so what exactly needs to be fixed then?
Regards,
Michael Heydekamp Co-Admin freexp.de Düsseldorf/Germany