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

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: Derek Martin <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 
Subject: Re: mutt/2304: reply / group reply behavior broken WRT $reply_to and 
$reply_self
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 02:50:47 -0400

 On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 07:45:02AM +0200, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
 >  >  >  I like the this (the current) behaviour.
 >  >  
 >  >  You will still get this behavior with proper settings of $reply_to and
 >  >  $reply_self.  The current behavior is patently wrong, because the
 >  >  Reply-to header IS NOT a reference to the sender's address, as clearly
 >  >  stated in RFC 822.
 >  
 >  In other cases I would get an different behaviour with the 'proper'
 >  settings. :(
 
 Bear in mind that this only affects mail that you:
 
  - sent to yourself
  - set a Reply-to header which is not your address
  - subsequently reply to that mail (regardless of what folder it is
    in)
  
 If you want the behavior to be different in this case, use a send-hook
 or some similar mechanism to unset $reply-to when you reply to your
 own mail.  This is not a big deal with my patch, but the "right"
 behavior is currently impossible with the current version of mutt and
 all previous versions.
 
 >  BTW:
 >  I'm not sure if the RFC applies in what to do if I reply to one of my
 >  own mails in $record.
 
 Reply-to is Reply-to... it doesn't matter where the mail is stored.
 Your $record folder is just an ordinary mail folder that you happen to
 think of differently than your other mail folders.  If Mutt wants to
 treat this folder as special, I guess that's fine... but as far as I
 know aside from copying sent messages there, Mutt treats it just like
 any other folder.