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
--
craig sanders
Reply to: