From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/26512 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lee Willis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: [OT] broken-reply-to Date: 09 Nov 1999 16:35:51 +0000 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <9t9u2mvvejj.fsf@mraz.iskon.hr> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035163707 19791 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 01:28:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 01:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: The Gnus Mailing List Return-Path: Original-Received: from lisa.math.uh.edu (lisa.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.49]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA18919 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 11:36:31 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by lisa.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAB00497; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 10:36:28 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 09 Nov 1999 10:36:44 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA01248 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 10:36:33 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mailgate.gbdirect.co.uk (root@bfd-gate.gbdirect.co.uk [194.217.100.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA18902 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 11:36:01 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from gbdirect.co.uk (lee@landlord.gbdirect.co.uk [192.168.0.129]) by mailgate.gbdirect.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03215; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 16:35:51 GMT Original-Received: (from lee@localhost) by gbdirect.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA29436; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 16:35:51 GMT Original-To: Toby Speight X-Face: "J~~0'L`GfL^sW4%+i35x#X308)K/$7\]qy)UZ$`k:}Bx]6mgAA^N5,@brn/19TPn%o;j28 W7mD)UN~se8P9\3?wU.g+i9)X writes: > Hrvoje> Hrvoje Niksic > > 0> In article <9t9u2mvvejj.fsf@mraz.iskon.hr>, Hrvoje wrote: > > Hrvoje> Lee Willis writes: > > >> Can anyone provide me with a pointer to the discussion of why > >> mailing-lists shouldn't put in Reply-To headers. > > Hrvoje> The document at > Hrvoje> sums it up pretty well. > > To bring this on-topic for ding-list: > > Should the documentation of the broken-reply-to parameter link to that > document (or a mirror of it on gnus.org)? Would make things easier, patch attached : --=-=-= Content-Type: text/x-patch Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=docpatch --- pgnus-0.98/texi/gnus.texi Tue Nov 9 13:00:05 1999 +++ pgnus-0.98-lw/texi/gnus.texi Tue Nov 9 16:34:23 1999 @@ -2075,7 +2075,8 @@ headers in this group are to be ignored. This can be useful if you're reading a mailing list group where the listserv has inserted @code{Reply-To} headers that point back to the listserv itself. This is -broken behavior. So there! +broken behavior. If you really don't believe us we suggest you go and +read @file{http://www.unicom.com//pw/reply-to-harmful.html}. @item to-group @cindex to-group --=-=-= Lee -- I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ... For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks" --=-=-=--