Mangled and non-mangled TUHS mail lists

[Grant Taylor]

On 10/03/2017 12:43 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> It's a valid viewpoint, but one of its consequences is that there is no
> straight way of relating multiple copies of the original message.  Not
> only in the somewhat shady case of personal reply+list followup, but
> also in the quite legitimate case of posting the same message to
> multiple lists.

You bring up a valid point.  Something I've not specifically thought 
about before, mainly because I've not wanted to maintain a MLM.

> A related situation is list managers that act as 2-way gateways from/to
> Usenet groups.  Mailman can do that, and when it does it rewrites the
> Message-ID.  The result is that all threads with mixed participants
> (posting both via Unsenet and via email) are broken.

I see no reason that the hypothetical MLM that I'm alluding to couldn't 
re-use the message ID or at least cite it in the References: header 
rather than making something arbitrary up.

I think that would help with the problem that you're describing.

> This is why I stopped reading the core GNU lists (help-gnu-emacs et al.)
> when they adopted Mailman.

I'm sorry.  That makes me believe that the list has failed in it's 
purpose of enabling communications.  :-(



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3717 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20171003/78736c5f/attachment.bin>