Interesting. On this list, I do not include the 'In-Reply-To:' field unless I hit 'g'. I will remember this.
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 at 00:14:48 +0200, Rocco Rutte soliloquized thusly: > Hi, > > * Dhruva B. Reddy [02-07-16 00:10:30 +0200] wrote: > > This seems to do what I want. Thanks, John. > > Good. And: how did you reply to the message? Your mail shows > neither an In-Reply-To: nor a References: header, i.e. it > breaks threading which mutt usally (generallly?) _not_ does. > > bye, Rocco >
