Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please check out http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html . The page > contains several arguments against the use of "Reply-To". I fully agree to > what Ian said.
I personally find header-munging of any sort distasteful, however I think a couple of points should be made clear: (1) a good mail client (e.g. a properly configured mutt) will give you the option of respecting reply-to, or ignoring it. (2) changing an existing reply-to to an x-reply-to is a fairly minor losage, given a good mail client. (3) a good mail client can thread duplicate replies together, making them easy to manage. A really good email client would probably have a mechanism for indicating that the previous message's author prefers to receive list mail only via the list address. Admittedly, this solution hasn't been designed, and debian-devel probably isn't the right place to design it, but it shouldn't be too hard to hack up mutt, gnus, and whatever other readers people like to support such a mechanism. I prefer to use reply to all recipients rather than reply to list. This is because I've been stung in cases where one of the recipients was not on the list I was replying to. Also, there are times when the list and/or the author's personal address have problems, and sending to both is just plain more robust. Anyways, a solution aimed at bad mail clients cannot be a solution (in my opinion). -- Raul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
