Re: mutt/2304: reply / group reply behavior broken WRT $reply_to and $reply_self
The following reply was made to PR mutt/2304; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Nicolas Rachinsky <mutt-devel-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: mutt/2304: reply / group reply behavior broken WRT $reply_to and
$reply_self
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:22:07 +0200
* Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2006-07-17 17:45 +0200]:
> More precisely, mutt will not honor a reply-to header when
> replying to messages written by oneself unless reply_self is
> set. The inference that's going on here is that the reply-to
> header is an address that points to the message's sender, so if
> the sender is removed from the recipient list, so is the
> reply-to header. Strikes me as the right thing to do.
I like the this (the current) behaviour.
Nicolas
--
http://www.rachinsky.de/nicolas