On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:04:29PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> All,
> 
> I wanted to take a moment to point out that I think the group-reply
> behavior, in particular when Reply-To is set, is not intuitive, and I
> dare say also not sane.
[...] 
> What I want it to do is reply to the sender (obviously via reply-to
> if that is set and not being ignored) AND all of the recipients.  But
> when Reply-To is set, it ONLY replies to the address in Reply-To.

It's probably worth mentioning...  I'm asking about this due to
ongoing DMARC discussions on various other mailing lists; inserting a
reply-to header makes mail clients almost universally do the wrong
thing with group-reply functionality, it seems.  It seems likely that
doing this is about to become a lot more popular, and mail clients
that don't deal with this well are going to make a lot of people
frustrated.

Granted, Mutt's list-reply functionality mostly makes this
uninteresting; however there are often times when I want to reply to
BOTH the sender AND the list (e.g. if the mailing list is known to be
kind of slow, and the poster is looking for a fast answer; or if the
sender requests direct replies, etc.), and therefore don't use it.  

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Attachment: pgpjRSoWFNCtN.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to