Re: [OT] Re: Please fix broken MUAs, was: GFDL v2 draft 1 analysis [long]
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Please fix broken MUAs, was: GFDL v2 draft 1 analysis [long]
- From: MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 10:42:21 +0000 (GMT)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20070102104222.0E720F6CC4@nail.towers.org.uk>
- References: <20061208173605.26809a19.frx@firenze.linux.it> <20061223194340.GA14198@capsaicin.mamane.lu> <20061223230826.3c8ef2bc.frx@firenze.linux.it> <20061229110604.GA15341@capsaicin.mamane.lu> <20061229155326.0117BF6D66@nail.towers.org.uk> <20061230182508.GS22055@hades.madism.org>
Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 03:53:25PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > That's probably because Mail-Followup-To is not the solution.
>
> you're a bit tiredsome with that. List-Post does not helps you to
> specify that you want to be set as a Cc: or not when someones answers to
> a mail.
Nor does M-F-T. There is no substitute for human intelligence and correct
configuration.
> [...] there is no harm in adding a harmless header that can help a lot of
> MUAs.
Look again at all the time and space consumed by pointless M-F-T advocacy
and you-ignored-my-M-F-T flames, if you think there's no harm in it.
> or please strip your signature, it costs many more octets than a M-F-T.
Unlike an M-F-T, it gives sometimes-useful information.
Regards,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: