Re: Replies to the list

[Jan Kohnert]

David Rogers schrieb:
> * Jan Kohnert <address@hidden> [2010-08-31 06:22]:
> >David Rogers schrieb:
> >> * Michael Welsh Duggan <address@hidden> [2010-08-30 18:04]:
> >> >Tim McNamara <address@hidden> writes:
> >> >> Is there a reason that the reply-to header is not set for the mailing
> >> >> list?
> >> >
> >> >Yes, there is a reason.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> >> >http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.txt
> >> 
> >> The logic at those links is impeccable but irrelevant.
> >
> >That are mail standards since 20+ years, if a MUA doesn't get it right,
> >it's not the fault of the list. ;)
> 
> True and still irrelevant. 

OK, I don't like Flamewars, so I'll stop here. But one thing I have to add:
You are using Mutt, according to your headers. Mutt in fact knows list-reply, 
at least according to [1]. So why not using this? That would solve all your 
problems. :)

[1] http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-2.html

-- 
MfG Jan

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.