Re: group-reply - bug or feature?
* Derek Martin <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [Jun 23. 2005 19:34]:
> > More precisely the feature had a full consensus: Everybody agreed.
> > But it wasn't included, for no known reason. The *option* is bloat of
> > course.
>
> Great... So, Mads, perhaps if you resubmit it without the stuff for
> the option (i.e. just make it the default behavior, no config
> variable), it would be accepted. If I have time this weekend, and you
> haven't already done it, maybe I will. Maybe. ;-)
Index: send.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/roessler/cvs/mutt/send.c,v
retrieving revision 3.37
diff -u -p -r3.37 send.c
--- send.c 3 Feb 2005 17:01:44 -0000 3.37
+++ send.c 23 Jun 2005 17:57:47 -0000
@@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ int mutt_fetch_recips (ENVELOPE *out, EN
if ((flags & SENDGROUPREPLY) && (!in->mail_followup_to || hmfupto !=
M_YES))
{
/* if(!mutt_addr_is_user(in->to)) */
- rfc822_append (&out->cc, in->to);
+ rfc822_append (&out->to, in->to);
rfc822_append (&out->cc, in->cc);
}
}
It's a pretty simple one without the config option :-)
Any update on the 1.5.10 plans?
--
Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk
"Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic
and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?"
-- A. P. J.