From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/3941 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sudish Joseph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: About to-addresses and followup [poll] Date: 13 Nov 1995 17:51:40 -0500 Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science Sender: joseph@cis.ohio-state.edu Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035144759 28037 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:12:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA13993 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:30:29 -0800 Original-Received: from news.cis.ohio-state.edu (news.cis.ohio-state.edu [164.107.8.50]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:51:41 +0100 Original-Received: from bank.cis.ohio-state.edu (bank.cis.ohio-state.edu [164.107.16.2]) by news.cis.ohio-state.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.4) with ESMTP id RAA03345 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 17:51:38 -0500 Original-Received: (joseph@localhost) by bank.cis.ohio-state.edu (8.6.7/8.6.4) id RAA20455; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 17:51:42 -0500 Original-To: The Ding list X-Mailer: VM 5.95 (beta), GNU Emacs 19.28.1 Original-Lines: 20 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:3941 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:3941 Quick poll, which of these two do you prefer? Background: If you have to-address set in a mail group, and you do a followup, the original author isn't CC'ed a copy. Instead, the to-address replaces the authors name. Note that the people who were CC'ed still get a copy, only the original author doesn't. a) Add the original author to the CC list. So we have to-address in the To header, and the original author in the CC header. b) Add both to-address and original author to To: header. I have a patch to fix this, it does (a) above. But it struck me that given the original meaning of To: and what other mailers do on a followup, it makes more sense to do (b). This might be a cosmetic issue, but it would irk those who do differentiate on whether they were to'ed or cc'ed a given message. Opinions? -Sudish