[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Header fields and followup address

* MJ Ray:

> [I am not subscribed to curiosa which this is now crossposted to -
> please cc me on replies only there.]
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
>> * Ben Finney: [...]
>> > It's essentially obsolete, at least for the purpose of mailing lists,
>> > since RFC 2369 fields that allow the “reply to list” function are
>> > deployed in essentially every mailing list manager. Let's agitate to
>> > fix the “reply to list” functionality [...]
>> The RFC 2369 headers don't work with cross-posting.  Mail-Followup-To
>> does.
> Mail-Followup-To doesn't work with *any* posting because it's so
> non-standard and different clients handle it differently.

Uhm, it's just Google Mail that does things in a substantially
differeny way.  Funny how their users think that it's the only correct

I've never understood why we, as Debian, can't agree on the exact
M-F-T semantics and implement them 100% consistently across our
MUAs. *sigh*

Reply to: