Re: [ML ISSUE] reply-to field ?
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > I must admit that your solution is right. I suggested another way to
> > do that, just by feeding the reply-to field to provide to the most the
> > opportunity to handle the ML with a maximum of usability -simply by
> > fixing the wrong reply addressee- and allowing the users to
> > sort/filter/search/browse this huge amount of information with the
> > tool they used to. But you -not you in particular, maybe you too, but
> > folks that answered me previously- don't like that solution. I don't
> > know why and I tried to discuss about it before but since there was no
> > debate, I can just imagine that there are good reasons. The best
On 02.04.07 01:09, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> One other thing is that Debian will not do go against the standards
> just because others do it.
...just because others are not able to follow them.
Breaking this standard would do more harm to people who are able to follow
it, than following of this standard does to people who are not.
So, if "we" have to decide if to support people/MUAs following standards, or
those not following them, the answer seems to be pretty clear to me.
Just ask google to implement the list-reply button, it would no harm to you
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, email@example.com ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Linux - It's now safe to turn on your computer.
Linux - Teraz mozete pocitac bez obav zapnut.