On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 10:37:49PM +0100, Richard Lyons wrote:
| On Tuesday 28 October 2003 20:30, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
| [...]
| > Hrm.. Does debian-user not set the reply-to to the list, or is this my
| [...]
| Apparently not.
Correct.
| I wonder why not.
These, probably amongst other reasons,
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
| It would surely be a good idea
No it wouldn't. Hmm, I should rearrange my set up just to prove the
point. :-D (make my From: address be an autoresponder that tells you
to use the address in the Reply-To: header)
| - for those using simpler mail clients.
If the tool doesn't work, get one that does. It's not like options
aren't available or are overpriced.
| I use kmail and filter lists direct to
| their own folders, where I set the reply-to-list address to try to prevent
| myself making mistakes...
|
| À propos, I've been thinking of giving mutt a try: can it do that too?
mutt doesn't do the filtering. Separation of responsibility. Instead
use maildrop or procmail to sort the mail into the proper folders.
mutt does have a list-reply function (in addition to reply and
group-reply (aka "reply to all")). One keystroke. It obeys CC/non-CC
requests in the Mail-Followup-To header as well.
mutt is _very_ powerful; at this point I use enough of its advanced
features and have enough keystrokes ingrained in my fingers that I
can't really handle mail (certainly not the volume of debian-user)
with any other mail reader
-D
--
Bugs come in through open windows. Keep Windows shut!
http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/
Attachment:
pgp_fdT86LFKk.pgp
Description: PGP signature