18 Aug
2007
18 Aug
'07
3:10 p.m.
Am 2007-08-14 17:09:14, schrieb Florin Andrei:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating
Reply-To munging per se. If all
mailing lists servers and all mail clients were well-behaved, then it
wouldn't matter - some kind of list identifier would be set by the
server, and all clients would dutifully add it to replies going to the
mailing list. So then the reply could be sent directly, not through the
server and everything would still work.
Sorry, but the Mail-Servers AND mutt plus some others do already
the right thing. I have "Reply", 2Group-Reply" and
"List-Reply".
And all thre have the right behaviour...
If you use a broken Mail-Client, maybe it is time for you to get a
better one or ask its Upstream/Developer to add the missing feature.
The reality is, this is a world far from perfect.
Reply-To munging is
the only way to keep things consistent across the board, no matter
Wrong, since IF I want to send a PM, I have to edit the message
and this bother me since I have to send over 50 PM's per day
byside 20-80 List-Messages.
what's the client or the server. If things get
better (more
standardized) with email software then fine, stop tweaking the stupid
header.
This is wrong, since if Mail-Servers to this BS, no Mail-Client
Author/Upstream/Developer will change the current behaviour...
They have not a minimum on motivation.
Greetings
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)