From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Feb  6 02:59:16 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id CAA15527
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 02:59:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au (rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au [129.78.129.109])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA15522
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 02:59:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from dawes@localhost) by rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au (8.6.11/8.6.9) id VAA17109 for freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:59:07 +1100
From: David Dawes <dawes@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au>
Message-Id: <199602061059.VAA17109@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au>
Subject: Re: List Duplicates
To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:59:06 +1100 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <199602060937.KAA00413@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Feb 6, 96 10:37:27 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>The xfree86-beta list solves this by the general policy that each
>*sender* of a message (not the list daemon) sets the reply-to field to
>the list himself.  This seems to work.  It's admittedly easier for

Actually, the list daemon does set the reply-to field for that list,
but it won't override a reply-to set by the sender.  Some people love
it, and some hate it.

David