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

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > > In fact, the only thing the RFC says to do is to honor Reply-To: headers,
> > > which I might note you didn't include in your message.
> > 
> > Why should I, when it would be no different from my From: header?
> It would be in your case: 
> Reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org

no, that would make it difficult for people to reply privately to him.

Mail-Followup-To is the correct header to use.

> The difference between pine and mutt is that you KNOW the overflows in
> pine....

incorrect, again. the difference between mutt and pine is that mutt is
a decent piece of free software that works and follows the relevant
standards, while pine is a broken piece of non-free shit which doesn't.

> mutt allegedly shares code with pine...

since the source-code of both programs is readily available it should be
easy enough to check this allegation.


craig sanders

Reply to: