On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 12:43:12PM -0500, Kurt Hackenberg wrote: > On 2024/12/05 01:08, Rene Kita wrote: > > > I wonder if the argument that modern MUAs make it easy to choose between > > 'reply' and 'group reply'/'reply all' still holds. > > The List-*: headers probably didn't exist 25 years ago, when that Reply-To: > piece was written.
They're ~ 26 years old now: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2369 (1998) That said, I think Thunderbird is an outlier here too. But either way, the issue mentioned in that Reply-To piece is still relevant now, because the exact argument is that munging the reply-to header to the list's address (which is not necessary in the case where a mailer supports a direct "list-reply" option) is harmful because you could reply to the list when you're trying to reply to the original sender _exactly_ applies in this case. w
