Closed Bug 505374 Opened 17 years ago Closed 13 years ago

"Reply to All" doesn't include the sender if the Reply-To header is present

Categories

(Thunderbird :: Message Compose Window, defect)

Product:
Thunderbird
Component:
Message Compose Window
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: LpSolit, Assigned: bwinton)

References

Details

In that case, it behaves exactly like "Reply to". This is probably not the desired effect.
Flags: blocking-thunderbird3?
I talked about this problem with bwinton, and he says we should respect the Reply-To header. Maybe could we do the following compromise: if the Reply-To and To headers are the same, then "Reply To All" should include the address in the From field rather than the Reply-To field, as the address in the Reply-To field will already be included in the list as it already belongs to the To field.
To be fair, I said that we might want to respect the Reply-To header. We might also want to reply to everyone when we click "Reply All". :) I'm hoping we'll get some good comments in this bug from people who have thought about this kind of thing for a long time, and together we can come up with the best answer. Or if we can't get that, maybe we'll get an amusing flame war instead. ;) (Personally, I kind of like your suggestion. It seems like it will be the right thing to do in the largest proportion of cases.)
From my research so far the main use of reply all in this situation is a work around for when a mailing list has changed the headers to make a message look like it was sent from the list. Reply all in this situation then allows you to get the original sender in the compose field such that you can edit out the list and reply directly to the person. Instead of using reply all as a work around for that use case I think we could file a blocker bug that implements the pieces described in bug 45715 comment 155 This would give the user a display of the available email addresses they could reply to.
Flags: blocking-thunderbird3? → blocking-thunderbird3-
I think we should detect Reply-To munging on mailing lists, as can be done e.g. with Mailman. "Reply list" is the default for list messages, but "Reply" and "Reply All" should make a difference, i.e. reply (also) to the author of the mail ...
P.S.: Can someone edit the summary so that it mentions "Reply-To munging"? Or should this be a separate bug?
Blocks: 515942
(In reply to comment #3) > From my research so far the main use of reply all in this situation is a work > around for when a mailing list has changed the headers to make a message look > like it was sent from the list. Reply all in this situation then allows you to > get the original sender in the compose field such that you can edit out the > list and reply directly to the person. In that case I'd want "Reply all" to reply both to the list and to the person. This is not always a bad idea: The sender is not necessarily on the list himself, e.g. when a message is re-sent to an internal distribution list, like <boardmembers-internal@foundation>.
Was this "fixed" or otherwise changed in Thunderbird 3.0? Reply-All is now replying to both the From: and Reply-To:. I do NOT like this behavior. Another use for Reply-To (besides lists) is when a user sends from one e-mail address but would like replies to a different address. This can be the case if a particular person's SMTP server requires the From: to be a particular domain but really wants replies elsewhere. In this situation, Thunderbird 3.0 replies to both and the other person gets two copies of my message. Please make this configurable or resort to the old functionality where From: was ignored if Reply-To: was found.
Does this address the Reply-To munging problem, or should this be a separate bug?
Assignee: nobody → bwinton
Bug 524277 seems to me to address the Reply-To munging problem a little more.
OS: Linux → All
Hardware: x86 → All
I find this quite irritating that when I reply-all to a message send to a list and others, then my message will only be addressed and the others, but not the sender. I support the view in comment 2 (reply-all should reply to all).
I'm marking this wontfix; respecting Reply-To (and don't including From) is the correct thing to do. Reply-munging is a problem - though likely not a huge one - but i don't see how we could do the wrong thing just to be safe, that would be totally wrong for i dare say the majority of cases where it's not munged.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
I'm sorry to say, the rationale for not fixing this is pretty silly. If the Reply-To header is set, then *by all means*, a regular reply should go only to the Reply-To address --- in that, you are certainly correct. But if the user has gone the extra trouble of clicking the (nicely hidden) Reply-All, shouldn't Thunderbird.... um, Reply ALL ? If you take "respecting Reply-To" to mean that you CAN'T send to the original sender, then probably you should lock down the from fields, disable the "Forward" button, etc, etc. Reply-To is typically used to assure that a response goes to the full list, not to forbid it from going anywhere else. Please re-open, and Fix; Thank you.
To extend the example of a common usage: A mailing list where some people tend to forget to reply to the whole group when they reply, but where outsiders are allowed (or even encouraged) to post. The Reply-To is needed to assure that normal replies go to all members. But (a functioning) Reply All is occasionally needed to reply to posts from outsiders: you want the reply to go to that outsider and also to the whole list. And again, since you have to make an extra effort for Reply-All, I don't see how it violates any implied intention of Reply-To.
Please see bug 77304 which has a patch to ignore reply-to for reply-to munging cases.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.