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

Re: Mutt & Mail-Followup-To header (Re: old bugs info)



Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> 
> > On Jun 14, Stephen Frost <sfrost@mail.snowman.net> wrote:
> > 
> >  >	So pine is supposted to support/understand an invented mail header?
> > Yes. Software can be upgraded and improved, you know?
> 
> But you can't expect other programs to support the proprietary extentions
> one program makes to a standard.

On the other hand, Mail-Followup-To is not really a proprietary
extension. There are, or at least were, people working on writing
an RFC about it. See for example:

http://www.jp.qmail.org/mta/ietf/draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt

It's nice if mailers use and support it, but things should work anyway.
Reply-To doesn't work as a substitute, it is overloaded with too many
meanings, unfortunately.

This has, of course, been discussed on debian-devel at least twice.

-- 
Lars Wirzenius <liw@wapit.com>
Architect, Kannel WAP and SMS Gateway project, Wapit Ltd, http://www.kannel.org



Reply to: