On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 05:24, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 03:25:51AM -0800, Alexander Hvostov wrote: > > On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 00:10, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > > > -- vbi (who is disappointed that evo doesn't know about > > > Mail-Followup-To) > > > > Why? It's a non-standard, poorly thought out, crude hack from djb (right > > up his alley, too). At least List-Post is specified in an RFC. > > 5 minutes ago you didn't even know it existed; now it's an appalling > idea just because it's djb's? How childish. I think you misunderstand me. '5 minutes ago' I didn't know Evolution had a 'reply to list' command. As for why I don't like M-F-T, I think it's an appalling idea not because it's djb's, but because it's non-standard, poorly thought out, and a crude hack, as I said. I also said it's right up djb's alley to produce something like that. > Why don't you like this header? I think it is useful. It allows a poster > to indicate exactly what they want to be done with followups to their > message. That's useful information. Debatably useful to mailers that understand it (i.e., yours), and utterly useless to everything else. If you want to 'indicate exactly' what you 'want to be done with followups' to your message, use Reply-To. That's exactly what it's for, it's defined in an RFC, _and_ you can expect every mailer out there to honor it, not just yours. Alex. -- PGP Public Key: http://aoi.dyndns.org/~alex/pgp-public-key -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d- s:++ a18 C++(++++)>$ UL+++(++++) P--- L+++>++++ E---- W+(+++) N- o-- K+ w--- !O M(+) V-- PS+++ PE-- Y+ PGP+(+++) t* 5-- X-- R tv b- DI D+++ G e h! !r y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part