From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/43723
Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail
From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=)
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Does Mail-Followup-To generation work?
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:22:48 +0100
Message-ID: <a5orrh$80s$1@quimby2.netfonds.no>
References: <m3bse8s40l.fsf@fermat.mts.jhu.edu>
	<m33czkz2cm.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu>
	<m3vgcg5iw6.fsf_-_@fermat.mts.jhu.edu>
	<87664gp6c8.fsf@paradoxical.net> <m3pu2o5h0h.fsf@fermat.mts.jhu.edu>
	<vaf3czkt3xh.fsf@INBOX.auto.gnus.tok.lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<m33czkt3ec.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1015018161 8220 195.204.10.66 (1 Mar 2002 21:29:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Mar 2002 21:29:21 GMT
Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13])
	by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 16guae-00028P-00; Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:29:20 +0100
Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists)
	by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1)
	id 16guV8-0002SU-00; Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:23:39 -0600
Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:23:41 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66])
	by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA08173
	for <ding@hpc.uh.edu>; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:23:29 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: (qmail 5589 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2002 21:23:21 -0000
Original-Received: (qmail 5584 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2002 21:23:21 -0000
Original-Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (129.217.4.42)
  by gnus.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2002 21:23:21 -0000
Original-Received: from lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lothlorien [129.217.19.67])
        by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de  with ESMTP id g21LMsb08527
        for <ding@gnus.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 22:22:54 +0100 (MET)
Original-Received: from lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lucy [129.217.19.80])
	by lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de id WAA27120; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 22:22:49 +0100 (MET)
Original-Received: by lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix, from userid 6104)
	id E83C03B47E; Fri,  1 Mar 2002 22:22:48 +0100 (CET)
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
In-Reply-To: <m33czkt3ec.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu> (prj@po.cwru.edu's message
 of "Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:54:13 -0500")
Original-Lines: 17
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.2.50
 (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: list
X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7
Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:43723
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:43723

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

> If the user explicitly sets it to nil, Gnus shouldn't override that.

Hm.

But on the other hand, why not change the MFT code to always look at
the group parameters?  Surely that can't be so harmful?  After all,
people who don't want to use the group parameter are unlikely to set
it: not setting the group parameter is enough to have Gnus behave
like before.  Right?

Thoughts?

kai
-- 
Silence is foo!