On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:40:39 +0200 Fabian Groffen <grob...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 16-06-2016 19:37:55 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:52:32 +0200 > > Fabian Groffen <grob...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On 16-06-2016 16:37:10 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > P.S. Please don't CC me when replying to my e-mails on the list, > > > > > since I'm already subscribed to the list. > > > > > > > > Please don't expect others to keep blacklists of people who can't > > > > handle their mail properly, or to generally harm others and ignore good > > > > practices because you can't handle your mail. > > > > > > You mean ignoring the Reply-To header is "good practice"? > > > > It's not being ignored, as you can see by the occurrence of the mailing > > list in CC. > > From RFC 5322: > > When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the address(es) to > which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. In the > absence of the "Reply-To:" field, replies SHOULD by default be sent to > the mailbox(es) specified in the "From:" field unless otherwise > specified by the person composing the reply. > > In other words, you sent it to me, while I requested you to send it to > the list. 'Suggests'. But if you insist, file a bug and stop bothering me. I'm not maintaining nor developing any mail client. -- Best regards, Michał Górny <http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>
pgpymVmqeQkMO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
