Re: [gentoo-dev] reply-to munging

[Georgi Georgiev <chutz@gg3.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1515 bytes --]

maillog: 14/04/2005-14:10:34(-0600): Jason Wever types
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> 
> > Reply-to-All is evil.  You should be using Reply-to-List.  I know that I
> > sure don't need to get the same email both on and off-list.  Off-list
> > emails should be reserved only for when you explicitly do not want to
> > send to the list and only to the original email's author.
> 
> And just how many mail clients support reply-to-list (which in and of 
> itself doesn't have well defined standards and is not adhered to in any 
> specific way by the myriads of mailing list software packages out there)? 
> Not very many last I checked.

"L" seems to work fine great in mutt. I do not have the word "gentoo"
mentioned in my muttrc, but it properly got the address from the
"List-Post" header. I also tried it on a "List-Post:<mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>"
posting (that was CCed to @lists) and it was properly addressed to
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org.

Congratulations. There is at least one properly behaving mail client.

It will be known how proper if it sets the Mail-FollowUp-To: header on
this mail.

> Best for now to deal with whether you want Reply-To to be altered or use 
> Reply-To all.

I don't really care, but out of principle -- don't touch the header is
my vote.

-- 
\    Georgi Georgiev   \  Apples have meant trouble since eden. --     \
 /    chutz@gg3.net     / MaDsen Wikholm, mwikholm@at8.abo.fi           /
\   +81(90)2877-8845   \                                               \

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]