From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Default for the envelope From in smtpmail.el Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 09:29:20 +0300 Message-ID: <83zk62c56n.fsf@gnu.org> References: <0xwr16rzz5.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1344666568 1489 80.91.229.3 (11 Aug 2012 06:29:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 06:29:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 11 08:29:28 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T05CO-0004rc-J9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 08:29:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35332 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T05CN-0002Qw-PP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 02:29:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43120) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T05CI-0002Qp-Me for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 02:29:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T05CE-0004Wh-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 02:29:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:60078) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T05CE-0004Wb-7X; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 02:29:14 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M8K00700V4Q1D00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 09:29:12 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M8K007GKVCO0Y20@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 11 Aug 2012 09:29:12 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <0xwr16rzz5.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:152428 Archived-At: > From: Glenn Morris > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 21:15:10 -0400 > Cc: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen > > Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > > > Currently, the default envelope from address (aka. SMTP "MAIL FROM") in > > smtpmail is `user-mail-address'. The user can change this by changing > > some rather confusing variables called `mail-specify-envelope-from' and > > `mail-envelope-from'. > > > > I wonder whether a more sensible default here would be to use the From: > > address in the buffer being sent. Some MTAs filter on the MAIL FROM, > > and only allow access based on a filter, and people adjust their From: > > headers to reflect that. > > This was an eminently sensible suggestion from July last year. > Please could it be now be implemented. > > The current default is dumb and can lead to confusing failure modes > ("553 From: address not verified"). Sorry, I cannot figure this out, neither the nature of the problem nor the details of the proposed solution. Can you spell that out? In particular, is the proposal to stop using user-mail-address, or stop using it in smtpmail.el only? If the former, I certainly object, because at least in my setup it is the source of the 'From:' header in the first place. If the proposal is for not using it only in smtpmail.el, then we need to verify that there are no valid use cases without a 'From:' header in the current buffer. Or maybe use 'From:' if it exists and fall back on the existing machinery if not.