On 1999-09-04 21:05:58 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> mutt is wonderful. However there is nothing perfect in this world (for
> me, that is), so I'd like to talk a bit about ignore_list_reply_to
> variable. We have a couple of local (in geographical sense) mailing
> lists in which mails come with a huge variance in To: fields, e.g.
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: "Programming mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
> To: My Good Friend [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and even
> To: "Someones Real Name" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (there are three aliases instead of one fixed domain name, so
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] above is always the same mailing list). It is now
> being voted if Reply-To should contain just the mailing list address
> (one of the three), or both mailing list and original sender address.
> Unfortunately, this renders mutt's `ignore_list_reply_to' completely
> useless.
The Reply-To: should only contain what the sender put there.
Cf. http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
And the list should identify itself by something like
X-Mailing-List: <listaddress>
If you want to filter it, it's best to look for X-Mailing-List oder
Sender.
Best regards
Martin
--
Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen
Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10
PGP signature
