From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9971 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Hrvoje Niksic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Checking `Reply-To' Date: 22 Feb 1997 03:47:11 +0100 Sender: hniksic@public.srce.hr Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149916 21635 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:38:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA21082 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 1997 19:02:52 -0800 Original-Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sat, 22 Feb 1997 03:47:14 +0100 Original-Received: (from hniksic@localhost) by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.5/8.8.4) id DAA06257; Sat, 22 Feb 1997 03:47:11 +0100 (MET) Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no X-URL: ftp://gnjilux.cc.fer.hr/pub/unix/util/wget/ X-Attribution: Hrv X-Face: &}4JQk=L;e.~x+|eo]#DGk@x3~ed!.~lZ}YQcYb7f[WL9L'Z*+OyA\nAEL1M(".[qvI#a2E 6WYI5>>e7'@_)3Ol9p|Nn2wNa/;~06jL*B%tTcn/XvhAu7qeES0\|MF%$;sI#yn1+y" Original-Lines: 14 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.15/XEmacs 19.14 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9971 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9971 I've just read the GNKSA review of RadicalNews, and have seen that the reviewer seems to require that the `Reply-To' header should be checked the same way as `From'. Gnus currently checks `From' only (and remember, that was the rationale for failing twice!). Regardless of GNKSA, I think Gnus should perform the same checks for `Reply-To' as it does for `From'. What do you think? -- Hrvoje Niksic | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- WWW: World-Wide-Waste. Waste management corporation, which handles the billions of tons of garbage generated by just about everybody these days.