<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: group-reply - bug or feature?



On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:47:06PM +0200, Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:
> > On a related note, IIRC, mutt used to reply intelligently (circa mutt
> > 1.4) if you executed group-reply on a message that you sent yourself.
> > Now, it seems if you do this, it prompts you with a blank To: field.
> > This isn't really all that useful...
> > 
> > I think ideally, it should place the address(es) from the To: field of
> > the original e-mail, and copy the CC: as is.  If I'm not making myself
> > understood, please feel free to ask for clarification.
> 
> This have been rejected in the past, with the reason not to bloat mutt
> with another config option.

Thanks for the patch!  I would hardly call a few lines of code
bloat, but FWIW I wasn't really suggesting a config option...  I
could swear mutt already behaved that way in the past, and I can't see
how any other behavior makes any sense (given all the other behaviors
associated with mutt recognizing one's own e-mail address).  That is,
I think it makes sense that the behavior I described should be the
default and only behavior.  I'm curious if anyone finds the current
behavior useful (and if so, why).

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  Thank the spammers.

Attachment: pgpcpHQ6MUVWI.pgp
Description: PGP signature