John, the two main problems that I run into for „default Reply-To: to from“ are:
1. The Reply-To: address does not come with a full name. The reply thus does not have the full name, which (a) makes the mail index less readable and (b) breaks searching for the user by name (unless it uses [email protected]) 2. When sent to a mailing list, replying to such a mail behaves differently from a „normal“ mail sent through the same mailing list, depending on mailing list configuration („reply to list“) and implementation (whether it merges, replaces, or ignores sender and list reply-to settings). To make this message on-topic for this mailinglist :-) and express my gratitude to Inverse (we should do that more often): I am very happy that SOGo provides a Reply-To option for when it is necessary, but novice users do not inadvertently stumble upon it. -Marcel Am 12.09.2014 um 08:02 schrieb John Kaufmann <[email protected]>: > In message of 2014-0911 15:17 -0500, Marcel Waldvogel wrote: > >> ... PLEASE, do not do what most of the Thunderbird are tempted to do, >> because of the prominent placement of the Reply-To address in the setup >> screen: PLEASE do NOT set your Reply-To address to your From address! >> This causes a lot of things to break and is completely unnecessary. > > Marcel, I am trying to understand this warning. While I completely agree that > it's daft ["completely unnecessary" is too kind] to set a Reply-To to the > From address, what does that break? > > John > -- > [email protected] > https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
