Re: how to reply to mailing list address by default?
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 12:32:46PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Will Yardley <mutt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The thing that's stupid about m-f-t is that mutt is basically the only
> > even remotely popular mailer that honors / generates it...
> Not true. Gnus, while not as popular as mutt, also does the right thing. A
> lot of other MUAs honor it while not generating it,
Like what?
Of popular mailers:
Outlook, Outlook Express: Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t
Mozilla / Thunderbird: Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t
Eudora: Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t
Hotmail, Yahoo Mail, Gmail, etc.: Don't generate / honor m-f-t
AOL (any version): Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t (AFAIK)
Evolution: Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t (AFAIK)
Kmail: Apparently honors it
Squirrelmail (> 1.4.5): Apparently honors it
Pine: Doesn't generate / honor m-f-t
I don't think nmh, gnus, mutt etc. really count as "popular".
Many newsreaders do support "Followup-To" (including some of the above
user-agents) for news.
> > the draft for it never became a standard (either officially or
> > unofficially).
> How is http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html not an "unofficial
> standard"?
It's not an "unofficial standard" because it's not widely used. In other
words, if there was a draft that never became an RFC, but were widely
used, it might be considered a de-facto standard.
> > I also don't like that you can't directly edit m-f-t with
> > $edit_headers set - there are times where you might want to alter
> > this by hand... I don't agree with the theory that mutt always does
> > the Right Thing here.
>
> Actually, it does. If you read the above URL, the logic for this
> becomes quite clear.
Well if anything, I'd want to read:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/I-D/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt
The "Mail-Followup-To" header can be inserted by the sender of a
message to indicate suggestions on where replies, intended for the
group of people who are discussing the issue of the previous message,
are to be sent [...]
There are times where I send a message to a mailing list, but want to CC
an individual person (who I know is also on the list) -- however I still
want replies to go to the list. That's one example of a case where
mutt's behavior isn't configurable (and spare me the lecture about how I
don't need to CC someone if they're not on the list - sometimes I might
wish to do this because I know it will be filtered differently if I CC
them directly, or I might wish to do this to indicate who is the primary
person responsible, etc. etc.).
I have no interest in reading anything written by djb, including his
thoughts on mail-followup-to. That's perhaps a closed-minded approach,
and to be honest, I don't care.
In any event, the original proposed draft was created in '97, expired in
'98, and it doesn't appear that anyone has attempted to make it an
Internet standard since then... so really, it's a lost cause... if
anything, mutt should consider working with the Reply-To header or some
similar kludge if they really want to make it easy for users to dictate
where followups should go.
w