Re: gnatsweb PR status change messages

[Yngve Svendsen]

At 18:01 16.11.2001 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Yngve Svendsen wrote:
> > Hm. After some more consideration, I have decided that this doesn't look
> > like the right way to solve the problem. If I am not completely
> > misunderstanding the problem, wouldn't the correct way to solve this be
> > to set a correct Reply-To header on these messages?
>
> Yes, but apart from being slightly more invasive a patch, my personal
> experience is that people often ignore the Reply-To while the keep the
> Cc.
>
> (If you prefer the Reply-To, I definitely won't object; we just should
> try to address this somehow.)

Actually RFC822 states that when a Reply-To header is present in a message, 
the client must always use _only_ the Reply-To list when replying, and not 
contents from any of the other headers, such as From.

I added the following Reply-To line to the current version 2 CVS:
Reply-To: $from, $mailto, $config{'GNATS_ADDR'}

In plaintext, this means that this field will contain all the recipients of 
the message itself (which means users replying will have themselves 
included on the recipient list, but that is a minor inconvenience), the 
From address (which is the person responsible for the PR) as well as the 
GNATS_ADDR.

Do you think this solves the problem? I was a bit uncertain whether to put 
the $from in the Reply-To, but I decided that would be the most logical 
thing to do.

I'll be kicking out a version 2.9.3 in a few days, just need to put in a 
couple more minor patches first.

- Yngve