On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 13:27:08 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote: > On Saturday, 2019-06-08 14:20:49 -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > >> Right now, if a To address is missing the personal (name) part, the From >> will be filled in with $realname in the reply. >> >> The ticket submitter expects that if the To address was missing a name, the >> reply From address should be the exact same: missing a name too. >> >> I think it's a reasonable expectation, but would like to confirm that >> opinion with others before I merge the patch. > > Problem is that both can be expected behaviour. > 1) the sender didn't know or fill in the real name, but I would like an > answer to have it; likely in everyday communication > 2) the mail was sent to an address that on purpose doesn't have a name > assigned, like a role account, it may even be it's read and answered > by different persons
The ticket assumes that both $reverse_name and $reverse_realname are set. In this configuration mutt should reuse the To: header of the message replied to as-is in the reply’s From: header, even if the name is empty. This is what the names of the configuration variables and their documentation imply ([1][2]) and what I personally expect. Using $realname unconditionally when $reverse_name is set is possible by unsetting $reverse_realname. This works correctly in my experience, however, is not what the ticket is about. [1] http://mutt.org/doc/manual/#reverse-name [2] http://mutt.org/doc/manual/#reverse-realname
