Ren? Clerc wrote: > * Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [04-12-2001 21:52]: > | Ren? Clerc wrote: > | yeah you're correct about 'reply' - my bad. however group-reply i'm > | pretty sure honors MFT... if i select group-reply, in response to your > | mail, it is just addressed to the mutt list. > > Then you probably have set ignore_list_reply_to=yes (where no = default) i don't.
zugzug [~]% grep -ri ignore_list_reply .mutt* zugzug [~]% so unless it's default (which it's apparently not) i don't think this is set. since i have some lists that munge reply-to headers, i am going to look into this however. besides, i don't think you had reply-to set on your message anyway... hitting group-reply still honors MFT i'm pretty sure. > Did you mean the "no provision for editing" is desirable, or do you > mean you would very much like to edit it? the latter. or at least i'd like to be able to edit it. > I don't want to edit this header: people who are cc'ed probably aren't > subscribed to the list, and asked to be cc'ed (this could be my > mistake ;). Therefore, I think it makes sense to have them added to > the MFT: they want to know how the thread ends. yes i agree, but sometimes _other_ people set MFT improperly (or even more likely, cc someone improperly). since people who are already set to receive followups are then included in YOUR MFT header, people who are actually on the list may end up getting ccd by everyone else. i've seen this happen in several cases. -- William Yardley System Administrator, Newdream Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/gpg.asc
msg21046/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
