From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5499 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Landley Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Mutt group reply Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 22:39:09 -0500 Message-ID: <53C5F3DD.4060207@landley.net> References: <20140713163421.GA23050@openwall.com> <53C2D6F8.2040908@skarnet.org> <20140713205859.GA25416@openwall.com> <20140714035144.GQ179@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <53C53A3D.5080409@landley.net> <20140715151248.GB17402@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1405481979 7413 80.91.229.3 (16 Jul 2014 03:39:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 03:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: Rich Felker Original-X-From: musl-return-5504-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 16 05:39:32 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 1X7G41-0004LF-OJ for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:39:29 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7808 invoked by uid 550); 16 Jul 2014 03:39:28 -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 7797 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2014 03:39:28 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8MWjzv6cJykitLY2Auy7eb3W+Jlw05vbCOt72L3Frns=; b=YB7XGo1FhNeYKTi8yI2RVpMShUdyAT0TwmdwJJZ2JydfHY3aVkrDUuJKWD/Hp4jBr/ cdInL1aaRnQdP6jxX7MXWNTzvGOjZnCRMUOGNMlp9TqWJqz1iaSA4wnVM+4mIL4He/4B 5Bgevsv8iwBmmrxKIlPIFIn7FxjPfpMXrykj4UuDLhgAu2vIPL9IM/bmfa/aNbiene8s zZ/aIQUT31LX1gM0PlixybQZ/wc+FCLhYLy4fSKoHz5qvlE+8VX5Hg0t1f4pztCU1ZUW Akr374JnNiFA4b511XQEgvOgtABVsP9P3d9MbLshQnYZ1OH241xwilmtG0xI0Uluftpz PiOg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlTAPHV2xM2smX2yEsIVWKW5ZN+4j6iCCco56hEKc0+ghRtDRWJwuCkM7wb904g7JqvMBu1 X-Received: by 10.182.115.134 with SMTP id jo6mr21276404obb.70.1405481956856; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:39:16 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 In-Reply-To: <20140715151248.GB17402@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5499 Archived-At: On 07/15/14 10:12, Rich Felker wrote: > 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'? Agreed. It's a bug. My guess why reply-to can still trigger such an obvious bug in a project this old and widely used would involve reply-to being obscure and seldom used. (Note: on _this_ email, reply all worked. Because I wash my email through gmail for the spam filtering and download it via pop, and doing so has a duplicate killer you can't disable, and this time the direct copy rather than the list copy arrived first. Since the reply-to is added by the list, a user replying to the copy they were cc'd on would never see a reply-to header in the first place. Which is one reason _why_ it's so seldom used; it doesn't actually work. If somebody isn't subscribed the list and you cc: them, their reply won't have a reply-to to force it to the list. So the people most likely to _need_ reply-to don't get it...) *shrug* Not a big deal. I mostly read the list archives on the web anyway... Rob