From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/33159 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Mail-{Followup,Reply}-To Date: 03 Nov 2000 12:12:50 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87zojhrrin.fsf@delivery.cam.eu.citrix.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035169316 23637 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:01:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from spinoza.math.uh.edu (spinoza.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.18]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92528D049A for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 12:13:24 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by spinoza.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAB17682; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 11:13:12 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Fri, 03 Nov 2000 11:12:36 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@66-209.196.61.interliant.com [209.196.61.66] (may be forged)) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20053 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 11:12:26 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (multivac.STUDENT.CWRU.Edu [129.22.239.69]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 61AF1D049A for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 12:12:51 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 32503 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2000 17:13:12 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Toby Speight's message of "03 Nov 2000 15:42:40 +0000" Original-Lines: 24 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33159 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33159 Toby Speight writes: > Paul> message-use-mail-followup-to > Paul> nil always ignore MFT > Paul> use always use MFT > Paul> ask always ask > Paul> t use MFT if it matches To+Cc (not To+Cc+From), otherwise ask > Paul> Sound good? I think the default should be t. > > I think that t should mean "always use" - that's the intuitive meaning. I was just trying to be parallel with message-use-followup-to, which uses t (actually, any non-nil value other than the ones with other meanings explicitly assigned to them) to mean 'conditionally ask'. I haven't written this code yet, but it'd probably also not explicitly compare to t - any unrecognized value would be interpreted this way. So the real question is: what value do we *document* as producing this behavior? In case more values are given meanings in the future, perhaps with one of the new interpretations grabbing unrecognized values, what value should we guarantee will retain this meaning? t is probably not a good choice for that. I think I'll go with ask-unless-trivial. paul