On 2026-08-23 14:09:35 +0200, Alejandro Colomar via Mutt-dev wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > > Date: 2026-08-23 11:09:02+0200 > > From: Vincent Lefevre <[email protected]> > > > [...] > > > I'd need to be persuaded that this isn't just "yet another > > > request for a config that will be used by three people". I > > > invite others to chime in if you agree or disagree with the > > > proposal. > > > > This depends on the forward. Sometimes, one may want to avoid > > references to the other messages, and sometimes, one wishes to > > keep the references, e.g. because after a reply, one forgets to > > put someone in Cc (who may have been part in the current thread), > > though there's also <resend-message>, depending on the context. > > I think I would like to have the choice. > > Out of curiosity, by "would like to have the choice" do you mean a > config?
Yes, it could be a quadoption. > Another way to "have the choice" would be to change to having the header > field unconditionally, and then with the edit_headers you could have the > final choice in the editor, by removing the field in the cases where you > don't want it. Even with edit_headers, the "References:" header is not part of the edited headers. But IIRC, one can add one, though to manually get the right Messages-IDs for such a header is more complicated than removing a line from the edited headers (if it had been part of the edited headers). -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Pascaline project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
