On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 06:41:59PM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 09:35:10AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2026-06-01 06:58:10 +0200, Rene Kita wrote: > > > I would suspect historical reasons for using 'users', mail(1) does use > > > the same terminology here: > > > > > > -c list > > > Send carbon copies to list of users. [...] > > > > > > Would be interesting to know, if it is because Unix is a multi-user > > > system and mail was primarily used to send email to other users. Or if > > > the idea is just that in the end it's a user who receives the email. I > > > like the version using 'users', it feels more personal. > > > > E-mail addresses may be mailing-list addresses or addresses > > to be handled entirely by software (e.g. subscription or BTS > > addresses), so I would say that "users" can be misleading. > > I agree 'users' feels warmer, but Vincent is right. The commit (86700b01) > also came from a mutt translator, and translators usually have good > instincts about preciseness of words, so I'm inclined to fix the ~t help to > say addresses too.
Just to be clear, I was not opposing such a change. If this can wait till the end of the month, I can take care of this change and also address the 'user name'/username fixes if you want, Kevin.
