On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 05:24:52PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 02:46:02AM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:04:17AM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > > However, the code of conduct seems to > > > point out that one should not Cc someone unless they specifically ask > > > for it (a guideline that you neglected to follow, after I pointed this > > > out to Mr. Bushnell). > > > > Frankly, I never check the recipient list when I press "g" in mutt. I > > assume that if you do not want to be CC'ed, then you can set up > > Reply-To: to express that. > > How? I can't use the same header for two purposes; if I want to specify > that private replies should go to one address, but I want list replies to go > to the list (and only the list), how do I go about that using only Reply-To?
Well, this is where the Mail-Followup-To: magic comes in I thought. Public replies respect M-F-T, so this is the header you should add yourself too when you're not subscribed. Private replies use Reply-To to find the recipient, if that fails it uses the From: header. In mutt M-F-T is used by "list-reply" (hitting 'L') if your mailing lists are set up properly. But I've heard people claiming M-F-T is not a proper standard (despite not having an X- in the header) and even being broken. Reply-To: should never be touched by mailing lists however[0], it is very annoying and private mails often go to the list instead of the person. And I agree that in the end it is down to the user to comply with the mailing list policy. Although that in the Debian case I regard setting M-F-T to myself (and the list) as an explicit CC request. [0] http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/ Floris -- Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]