On Wed 02 Jul, Richard Heycock bloviated thus: > Why is that this list doesn't have the 'Reply-To:' header field set? It > would make life much easier, it's a pain in the arse to reply to reply > to a list without cc'ing the original sender. Is there a reason for > this? am I missing something?
Because it's not what Reply-To is designed for. What is so hard about reply-all? "Reply-To" Munging Considered Harmful http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html -- Rev Simon Rumble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.rumble.net "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
