Re: new Mail-Followup-To patch...please take a look...

["Matt Armstrong" <matt+dated+1007005773.86e2b5@lickey.com>]

prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:

> Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:
>> "Matt Armstrong" <matt+dated+1006984700.195575@lickey.com> writes:
>>> Anyway, I was reading http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html and in
>>> particular, this portion:
>>>
>>>     You may want to warn the user when he views a message where
>>>     he's not included in Mail-Followup-To. This usually indicates
>>>     that the user has subscribed to a mailing list shown in
>>>     Mail-Followup-To, but hasn't told you about that mailing
>>>     list. Or it may indicate that someone is redirecting the
>>>     discussion.
>>
>> Yes, this wouldn't be hard, but when should this warning happen?
>
> The excerpt above says "when he views".

Yes, exactly.

I would put this feature low on the priority list though.



prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:

> Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:
>> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
>>> When displaying a message, if MFT exists, and none of the given
>>> addresses would cause MFT to be generated for a response, then we
>>> can give a warning, and maybe offer to add the address (if there's
>>> only one) to this group's parameters (assuming the new
>>> mail-address vector parameter).
>>
>> Yeah, this sounds like a good idea, especially when combined with
>> the new mail-address vector.  Are you working on this?
>
> Not really.

I do hope we get Josh's initial message.el MFT support into Oort Gnus
soon (with appropriate peer review, of course).  It is useful without
all the group parameter stuff and can be considered separately.

I don't want to see this entry in the FAQ:

  Can Gnus generate Mail-Followup-To: headers?

  Apply the patch below.  The author disappeared before we could get
  his signed FSF papers, so we can't make this part of Gnus.  Somebody
  is free to re-write it!

-- 
matt