[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post
From: |
Ken Hornstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:16:06 -0400 |
>If you're the sort of person that has a secretary send email for you
>(probably less common now than when the RFCs were drafted, but still...)
>then you'd want the bounce to go to the secretary and have them deal
>with it, since you're clearly too busy for such minutiae.
>
>As such, I'd say if Sender is present, always prefer it over From,
>regardless of how many From addresses there are. This will hold true
>even if you don't have a secretary. If you've specified a Sender, I
>can't imagine why you'd want bounces to go elsewhere.
... alright, I think I can be persuaded by this argument, and since
it's overridable with Envelope-From, it's not a huge impact if we get
it wrong. Anyone else want to weigh in before I make this change?
--Ken
- [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Ken Hornstein, 2012/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Tethys, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Paul Fox, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Ken Hornstein, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Paul Fox, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Robert Elz, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Ken Hornstein, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Robert Elz, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to post, Robert Elz, 2012/03/12