Hello Phill,
Phill Harvey-Smith <phill-list@???> (Do 16 Jul 2009 15:59:29 CEST):
> Hi all,
>
...
>
> I am a member of an email mailing list that's list owner insists on
> setting the reply address back to the original sender rather than the
> more conventional reply to the list.
Your're not talking about *this* list? ;-) -- I'm not sure about what is
more conventional. Both solutions have pros and cons. From my POV it's
heavily dependant on the list audience. The more qualified they (the
subscribers) are (talking about the ability to use a mail client), the
more I'd tend not to modify the Reply-To/From etc, because they are able
to differentiate betweena "(r)reply" and a "(l)ist reply".
> So what I would like to do is insert a Reply-To: header that by default
> sends replies back to the list. There are other headers that I can use
> to identify the list messages, so that I only re-write the correct
> messages, infact one of the headers the list software inserts, has the
> address of the list.
You could use a "headers_add = Reply-To: ... " in your transport, probably combined
with a "headers_remove = reply-to.
Here is some untested pointer.
# Macros for readability
IS_LIST = match{$h_list-id:}{exim-users}
# or this one:
# IS_LIST = def:h_list-post:
begin transports:
local_user:
...
headers_remove = ${if IS_LIST {Reply-To}}
headers_add = ${if IS_LIST {${address:${sg{$h_list-post:}{mailto:}{}}}}}
Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
--
SCHLITTERMANN.de ---------------------------- internet & unix support -
Heiko Schlittermann HS12-RIPE -----------------------------------------
gnupg encrypted messages are welcome - key ID: 48D0359B ---------------
gnupg fingerprint: 3061 CFBF 2D88 F034 E8D2 7E92 EE4E AC98 48D0 359B -
