On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 01:38:19AM +0200, ilf wrote:
I would like a workaround to use Regex in 'lists' and 'subscribe', but that feels dirty. Why doesn't Mutt allow 'lists'/'subscribe' to lists based on the List-Id: header?
The List-ID header is not necessarily a valid email address. All that the RFC requires is that it be a unique value for each list. As such, it's not terribly useful for figuring out where to reply. This is why Mutt consults the List-Post header field instead when doing a list-reply.
The problem with not using the subscribe command in Mutt is the very common case where your address appears on the To or CC line in addition to the mailing list address. In this sitation you will receive two copies of the email: one directly from the message sender, and another from the mailing list software. The former will *not* have any List-* headers in them, but the latter will. However, they will both have the same Message-ID field! Many Mutt users supress duplicate messages through the use of procmail/formail, so you are most likely to only see the message that came directly from the message sender (sans List-* header fields) in your mailbox.
So if Mutt were to auto-detect the List-Post header field, it would only be a partial solution--you'd still have to use the subscribe command to ensure that Mutt detected all mailing lists.
me
