nformation currently put in Mail-Followup-To in the Reply-To header?
An option like followup_in_reply_to would be useful IMHO.
Of course, mailing-lists adding a Reply-To header would break that, but
anyway there is no perfect solution.
Any comments?
--
Hugo Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://larve
's what I was proposing:
Suppose that I want to send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and that I
am not subscribed to this list. I would like replies to go to the list
and myself.
It is currently possible to have Mutt put the following header
automatically:
Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
ustrated, but I am convinced. :-)
I found an Internet Draft about it, but it expired 2 years ago:
http://qmail.edge.ne.jp/mta/ietf/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt
Maybe it's time to write a new one.
--
Hugo Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://larve.net/people/hugo/
Hi.
Are there any plans for support of RFC2369[1] headers?
I just discovered that Pine was offering a neat interface to unsubscribe
from a mailing list, get help, etc, using the List-* headers, and now
I'm jealous. :-)
Regards,
Hugo
1. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2369.html
--
Hugo
, and I am therefore
announcing it to Mutt users:
http://larve.net/people/hugo/2002/04/mutt-display-filter
Comments and contributions are welcome.
Regards,
Hugo
1. http://www.escape.de/users/tolot/mutt/t-prot/
--
Hugo Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://larve.net/people/hugo/
Al
