So, I’m currently wrangling with bits of RT 2.0’s mail sending
capabilities. When it’s sending mail to a group of people, should
it be sending mail to each recipient individually with the To:
header set or should it send one message to everyone? If the latter,
should it explicity list all its recipients or should everyone be
a blind CC? RT 1.0 explicitly lists everyone and it tends to have
problems in some environments.
jesse
jesse reed vincent – jrvincent@wesleyan.edu – jesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
This is scary. I’m imagining tracerouting you and seeing links like “Route
84” and “Route 9, Exit 14”. Obviously, this is illness induced.
–Cana McCoy
So, I’m currently wrangling with bits of RT 2.0’s mail sending
capabilities. When it’s sending mail to a group of people, should
it be sending mail to each recipient individually with the To:
header set or should it send one message to everyone?
Ideallisticly, I think we should use the latter, but I can see reasons why
the first one might be better.
My suggestion is to separate clearly between the emails sent to external
requestors and the emails sent to misc. “watchers”. The first one should
be sent individually with only the “right” name and email in the subject.
The latter should be sent with a long Cc or Bcc list. Whether to use Cc
or Bcc should be configurable.
From: Jesse [mailto:jesse@fsck.com]
So, I’m currently wrangling with bits of RT 2.0’s mail sending
capabilities. When it’s sending mail to a group of people, should
it be sending mail to each recipient individually with the To:
header set or should it send one message to everyone? If
the latter,
should it explicity list all its recipients or should everyone be
a blind CC? RT 1.0 explicitly lists everyone and it tends to have
problems in some environments.
I am in favor of including all methods and letting the user decide via some
mechanism (e.g. associate with the link type, or with the ticket being
replied to).
If you can’t do that, I’d do one message and bcc them, for large numbers of
recipients it is more efficient. Individual To lists would be next.
Well, I think what’s going to happen is that I’m going to have to generalize the whole thing
and do token replacemenmt in the templates to get this is flexible as everyone wants.
Now to figure out how to get all our mailer methods to deliver to the addresses
in a scalar rather than the addresses in the To: Cc: and Bcc: headers.On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 05:23:53PM +0200, Tobias Brox wrote:
If you can’t do that, I’d do one message and bcc them, for large numbers of
recipients it is more efficient. Individual To lists would be next.
Individual To lists are (unfortunately) the only thing that is good enough
when dealing with external support, IMO.
Bcc’s and/or Cc’s are usually best when it comes to internal support and
sending mails to people which are familiar with the system.
jesse reed vincent – jrvincent@wesleyan.edu – jesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
A REAL sysadmin challenge is “resurrect five dead mailserver while so ripped
to the gills on mdma that you can’t focus on any given line of text for more
than 10 seconds continuously.”
-Nathan Mehl
So, I’m currently wrangling with bits of RT 2.0’s mail sending
capabilities. When it’s sending mail to a group of people, should
it be sending mail to each recipient individually with the To:
header set or should it send one message to everyone? If the latter,
should it explicity list all its recipients or should everyone be
a blind CC? RT 1.0 explicitly lists everyone and it tends to have
problems in some environments.
Can it be a configurable option? At my site all of our requestors are
internal users and it would actually be nice for them to know that a
group/bunch of people all had the issue resolved or updated.