Re: Identities and Bcc:

[Brian Stafford <brian stafford uklinux net>]

On Wed, 29 August 14:46 Eric Dexter wrote:
> 
> Hi Brian, I felt like I should comment...since the last time the BCC
> header came up on the list, it was because of a problem I was having.

OK

> On 2001.08.29 05:56 Brian Stafford wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Just messing around with some of the settings in identities and
> > noticed that
> > the Bcc: field isn't, I feel, showing the desired behaviour.
> 
> I'm hoping that the problems you're seeing aren't "features" that I'm
> seeing <g>. I don't use identities, but BCC seems to work (right out
> of the tarball) for the first time in Balsa.

No, the Bcc: as entered in the compose/reply windows is exactly right.
It does what you and I expect and furthermore it complies with RFC 2822.

> > I'm presuming that the intent is for the message sender to mail a
> > personal copy
> > of the letter to a suitable mailbox.  Unfortunately, this is not
> > what Bcc:,
> > as described in RFC 2822 and implemented in Balsa, does.  Basically
> > Bcc: is
> > the wrong mechanism for this purpose.
> 
> I've thought that too...The Fcc header that Jules Bean mentioned may
> be more appropriate. Even though, I've just made use of the Sentbox
> for this purpose.

I feel that Bcc: is the wrong mechanism for this effect, precisely because
of its highly desirable semantics.  I also feel that Fcc purely to a local
file is too restrictive.  I can see no reason why a personal copy shouldn't
be sent to a mailbox using SMTP as an alternative to copying it to a file.
But I don't think this function should be confused with Bcc:

> > Ideally, the Bcc recipients listed in the identity are not added
> > directly to
> > the message's bcc: list.  The algorithm should be as follows:
> > if the message has bcc recipients, add the identity's bcc recipient
> > to the
> > Bcc: copy of the message.  That way the message sender gets the
> > message
> > with the Bcc: header intact.  If there are no bcc recipients add the
> > identity's
> > bcc recipients to the normal copy of the message.
> 
> So, you're NOT questioning the method of sending BCC messages
> normally....just when used within an Identities configuration right?

Absolutely correct.

> Just to recap, my (now fixed) old problem.
> 
> Apparently, in previous versions of Balsa, Balsa would add the Bcc
> header to ALL copies of the email...including to the people listed in
> the To: header. I believe you fixed the problem by telling Balsa to
> ONLY append the Bcc: header, when sending the message to Bcc:
> recipients, and not to append it when seding to To: recipients. This
> of course, forces Balsa to send emails that contain Bcc headers TWICE.
> Once for the To: recipients, and once for the Bcc: recipients.
> 
> Once again, you're not questioning THIS methodology are you?

No.  Balsa as it now works is correct per common sense *and* RFC 2822.
It may even be leading the field by performing the Bcc: function correctly.

> BTW, thanks again for helping me with this problem.

No problem :)

Brian