Peter Lebbing wrote: > On 27/03/13 14:40, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > > I created it, as far as I recall, from my copy direct from Ulrich, > > which had no Mail-Followup-To > > Correct, the problem originated when you replied[1] to Werner's mail[2]. > Werner's mail had the following header: > > Mail-Followup-To: "Julian H. Stacey" <j...@berklix.com>, gnupg-users@gnupg.org > > The difference between that line and a simple Reply-to-All is that Werner > would > be in the recipient list with the Reply-to-All, and not with the > Mail-Followup-To. Your reply should have only had gnupg-users@gnupg.org and > your > manually added CC to Ulrich as recipients, since your MUA would conclude that > you don't need to CC yourself :). > > > I'm familiar with Reply-to: Not familar with Mail-Followup-To: > > What's the difference ? > > Because Reply-To didn't really work out in practice for mailing lists, DJB > came > up with two "non-canon" mail headers to remove ambiguity from the meaning of > the > Reply-To header. He describes it in [3]. Not everybody agrees with his > view/solution, though.
The quoted [3]<http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html> contains: News: The following list is obsolete. Daniel Faber has collected a newer list of Mail-Followup-To implementations at http://www.leptonite.org/mft/software.html. which contains refs to claws mail etc ... http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1441 "Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX" ... 2007 2008 ... Colin Leroy 2008-07-05 15:52:44 CEST I'm marking this WONTFIX. So Claws-mail project have no interest to implement Mail-Followup-To .. & Claws-mail is a modern mailer (a friend who used to use EXMH reckons claws-mail is slicker/ better/ more modern than exmh he used & I still use) http://larve.net/people/hugo/2000/07/ml-mutt "It is not a standard .. a hack that can potentially do more harm than good" http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt Includes reply-to Does NOT include Followup-To http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/43/I-D/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt The ''Mail-Followup-To'' header November 1997 ... Internet-Draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2076 3.5 Response control ... "ambiguous, since" ... controversial ... RFC 822 RFC 1036 author Reply-to: Works fine on lists I run with majordomo on berklix.org seems to help lots of people running a variety of MUAs on Microsoft & Unix etc do better than they did before. Peter off list sent me a PS: > Oh, and BTW, I couldn't easily find whether EXMH supports > Mail-Followup-To (which makes me lean towards: no, it > doesn't, because you'd expect documentation to show up if > it did). I looked (after doing a'make patch' to extract source trees on latest FreeBS current ports) cd /pri/FreeBSD/branches/-current/ports/mail/exmh2 find . -type f -exec grep -l -i Followup-To {} \; find . -type f -exec grep -l -i Reply-To {} \; ./work/exmh-2.8.0/exmh.CHANGES ./work/exmh-2.8.0/exmh.README ./work/exmh-2.8.0/exmh.TODO ./work/exmh-2.8.0/lib/html/exmh-faq.html ./work/exmh-2.8.0/lib/html/exmh.CHANGES.txt ./work/exmh-2.8.0/lib/html/reference.html ./work/exmh-2.8.0/lib/thread.tcl ./work/exmh-2.8.0/misc/mhthread ./work/exmh-2.8.0/misc/mhthread-manpage.html cd /pri/FreeBSD/branches/-current/ports/mail/nmh find . -type f -exec grep -l -i Followup-To {} \; ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/DIFFERENCES ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/FAQ ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/TODO ./work/nmh-1.5/etc/replgroupcomps find . -type f -exec grep -l -i Reply-To {} \; ./work/nmh-1.5/ChangeLog ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/ChangeLog_MH-3_to_MH-6.6 ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/ChangeLog_MH-6.7.0_to_MH-6.8.4.html ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/DIFFERENCES ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/FAQ ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/MAIL.FILTERING ./work/nmh-1.5/docs/TODO ./work/nmh-1.5/etc/digestcomps ./work/nmh-1.5/etc/replcomps ./work/nmh-1.5/etc/replgroupcomps ./work/nmh-1.5/man/mh-format.man ./work/nmh-1.5/test/forw/test-forw-digest ./work/nmh-1.5/test/repl/test-multicomp ./work/nmh-1.5/test/repl/test-trailing-newline ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/forwsbr.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/mhlsbr.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/post.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/rcvdist.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/replsbr.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/slocal.c ./work/nmh-1.5/uip/spost.c Conclusion: I will ignore/ forget Followup-To & stick to Reply-To. Werner wrote: > To: Peter Lebbing <pe...@digitalbrains.com> > Cc: "Julian H. Stacey" <j...@berklix.com>, gnupg-users@gnupg.org > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 19:27, pe...@digitalbrains.com said: > > > Whether you like the headers Bernstein created or not, it would seem Werner > > didn't want to be on the recipient list, which is why I brought it up > > The thing is that I put most mailing lists I am subscribed to on Gnu's > message-subscribed-addresses list. This list takes care of maintaining > a MFT header. Gnus will do that only if it can be sure that everyone > agrees to this. Thus in most cases you will see an explicit CC anyway. > MFT works only for those folks with full support of MFT and if they > maintain their list of subscribed addresses well. Given that the bad > habit of sending text+html alternative mails seems to be impossible to > expunge [1]; Yup, horrible (as also is quoted printable, usually not needed) > I consider missing MFT handling a micro annoyance. > > I any case, I consider it a good idea to explicitly add a To: header to > notify the addressee that this particular mail gains his attention. Yup > > BTW, exmh is a nice MUA I used a long time ago and only stopped using it > because back then a remote X connection was not really usable (and I > didn't want to use plain mh). Not sure what remote problems you had, but: Even localy EXMH reply key does not work right unless one starts from ttys with xdm & uses xauth. Starting with the ttys login xhost + route fails. A person at my site regularly uses an EXMH on a slow X display started from xdm, with AMD + NFS ~/mail/ on a faster server, works fine. Yesterday I was just testing a new EXMH, both with DISPLAY= local laptop screen, & my tower display, but in both cases exmh running on laptop, with NFS+AMDsupporting ~/mail , with 493 sub dirs (`find . -type d | wc -l`) It took minutes to start. Unusable really, I need to solve that. I assume one could use ssh to support a tunnel for X for EXMH, but not tried that as I dont need it. > Shalom-Salam, > > Werner > > [1] If you often send mails to Outlook users, you may want to use the > X-message-flag header to tell them about this problem. I run lists with 100s of people, mostly clueless MS users, running every MUA one can dream of. Less of a dream than a nightmare. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with "> ". Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
