a plea

[Rasmus Lerdorf]

Chris Travers wrote:
> On 9/14/07, *Russ Nelson* <nelson at crynwr.com <mailto:nelson at crynwr.com>>
> wrote:
> 
>     Lawrence Rosen writes:
>     > One thing that's kept me from responding publicly so far is that,
>     > when I do, people reply "to-all" instead of just to the list and I
>     > get two (2) copies of each of these emails. Ugh!  Once is
>     > punishment enough! So please, reply only to license-discuss!
> 
>     Indeed.  Part of this problem is a software design problem.  Email
>     clients need a "Reply To Recipient" command, which on the face of it
>     seems stupid.  Why would you reply to yourself??  But ... read on:
> 
>     http://russnelson.com/rt.html
> 
> 
> Russ:  Can you recommend an email client with this feature?
> 
> If not, this discussion should be on the merits of choices based on
> actual client support.  I can accept that the duplicates may be seen as
> a necessary evil, but maybe we suppress emailing out the dupes in some way?

The geek approach is of course to add a simple procmail rule on our mail
servers:

 # Remove duplicates
:0 Whc: msgid.lock
| formail -D 16384 msgid.cache
:0 a:
duplicates

No more duplicates.  This needs to be done on the receiving server.  It
can't be done by the list server since the list server only sends one
copy.  The other copy comes directly from person replying.

-Rasmus (seeing just how far off-topic this list can get)