On 2026-08-24 10:26:30 +0100, Ian Collier via Mutt-dev wrote: > On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 10:19:11PM -0400, Kurt Hackenberg wrote: > > I think Mutt should not do that, because a forwarded message is not a reply. > > Those two message types are used for different purposes. Conflating them > > would cause confusion and frustration. > > I agree that a forwarded message is not a reply and should not be > recorded in the In-Reply-To header. However, I think that if you > forward a message then you are explicitly referring to it, and so there > is no clear reason why the References header should not be used. On the > other hand, this doesn't benefit the recipient, because they don't have > the original message (or you wouldn't have needed to forward it).
If the forwarded message has References: <A> <B> <C> Message-ID: <D> it is debatable whether to put <D> in the "References:" of the new message. But it really makes sense to still have <A> <B> <C> in the "References:" of the new message. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Pascaline project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
