From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5484 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Mutt group reply Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:12:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20140715151248.GB17402@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20140713163421.GA23050@openwall.com> <53C2D6F8.2040908@skarnet.org> <20140713205859.GA25416@openwall.com> <20140714035144.GQ179@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <53C53A3D.5080409@landley.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1405437194 11887 80.91.229.3 (15 Jul 2014 15:13:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:13:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: Rob Landley Original-X-From: musl-return-5489-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue Jul 15 17:13:07 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1X74Pg-0001GT-M3 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 17:13:04 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 21751 invoked by uid 550); 15 Jul 2014 15:13:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 21743 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2014 15:13:03 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53C53A3D.5080409@landley.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5484 Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 09:27:09AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > On 07/13/14 22:51, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:58:59AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > >> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 07:59:04PM +0100, Laurent Bercot wrote: > >>> On 13/07/2014 17:34, Solar Designer wrote: > >>> > >>>> An alternative is to reconfigure the list so that it doesn't set the > >>>> Reply-To header, but this may result in many replies being inadvertently > >>>> sent off-list. I think it's better for Mutt users to adopt a habit to > >>>> answer that question with "n". > > > > Thanks! I had been looking for a solution to this issue for a long > > time but didn't bother to really look into it. > > Thunderbird's "reply all" will _only_ reply to the reply-to, and I wind > up manually copying in individual email addresses to cc: when I bother. > (Yes, it has a 'reply list' button, but the reply-to header overrides > the difference.) Reply-to headers should not override the 'reply to all' feature in a mail client. If they do, this is a bug. What use is 'reply to all' if it behaves the same as plain 'reply'? > So it breaks other mail clients too. Largely because reply-to seems to > be used so seldom, and thus isn't particularly debugged. (This is the > only list I've followed in the past 5 years at least that uses reply-to.) In lists I've been active on, I've seen both approaches. oss-security and all the mplayer and ffmpeg lists are other examples that use(d) Reply-to. Busybox and uclibc and libc-alpha (glibc) are some that don't. I can use both (especially now that I found a good solution for avoiding messing up replies myself) but I pretty strongly prefer the use of Reply-to, because it tends to avoid having people accidentally reply off-list and losing the continuity of threads on the list. And since it's easy to detect Reply-to generated by the list (e.g. just look for the To and Reply-to addresses matching), any good client should be able to override this default for power users who really want to override it. Rich