Re: Special need of key rebinding
Hi Charles :)
* Charles Cazabon <mutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dixit:
> > > Yes, I believe you can remap the list-reply function to the 'r' key
> > > for just that mail folder, using a folder-hook.
> > I didn't mention, sorry, but all mail is in the same folder O:)
> Well, fix that. Use maildrop or procmail or whatever else to sort
> your list mail into separate folders. It takes two minutes and
> buys you more efficiency.
I don't like procmail (long story), I don't like fetchmail (not
so long story, but...). In fact, I prefer to use the 'fetch-mail'
facility of Mutt and having all my incoming mail in the same folder.
For me is more practical and makes me deal with my mail faster. I've
used multiple folders in the past and was a pain in the arse. I
simply cannot remember to manage all folders, mostly because I use to
answer mail in a hurry: as you can see, is all a matter of bad
habits. I'm forced, in a way, to manage three folders of mail for
different accounts I manage online, and I end up ignoring two of
them. For me one Inbox is plain perfect.
> > > > The solution is to get a correct Reply-To,
> > > No, Reply-To: is not intended for this.
> > Why it is intended, then? I've used this as a mean to set the appropriate
> > reply address for messages sent to this list, so when people answers such a
> > message, they reply to the list address :? Obviously I was wrong.
> Reply-To: is intended to tell others "if you want to send a
> (private) reply to me, use this address instead of the one in my
> From: header". There's various reasons for it.
So I should set 'Reply-To' to my own address when sending mail or
I better stop munging headers and drop 'Reply-To'?
> Mail-Followup-To: tells people where they should send a followup message --
> and can contain multiple addresses, so it can be used to /automatically/ say
> "please cc: me on list replies, because I'm not a subscriber" or "please reply
> only to the list, because I'm a list member and don't want extra copies of
> list messages".
I've noticed that Mutt does this for me pretty good :))
> > The fact is that when I receive a message from somebody on that
> > list who sets up its Reply-To: and I hit 'r' (group-reply), the reply
> > correctly goes to the list address
> See http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html and
> http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html ; this is a really old topic.
A few minutes ago, in fact before receiving your mail, I googled
for the issue and came to the DJ Bernstein page. Now I realize why
Reply-To is harmful. Thanks a lot for the information, I really mean
it :) Thanks for literating me in this issue, I was doing a bad thing
with good intentions O:)
But now the problem is just moved: the list won't add (obviously)
the Mail-Followup-To, but the MUA's of some users won't do neither.
Mozilla MUA, for example, cannot (AFAIK) add that kind of headers,
and I cannot ask all users to switch to a good MUA. I've been stuck
in the past with that 'Mutt is very difficult to configure' (it must
be true, because I haven't touch my config for two years. Oh, no, I
haven't done that because it works seamlessly). I'm not in the mood
of fighting people to use a good MUA :(
Thanks for all, Charles :)
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/