Am 2007-08-14 17:09:14, schrieb Florin Andrei:
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating Reply-To munging per se. If all
> mailing lists servers and all mail clients were well-behaved, then it
> wouldn't matter - some kind of list identifier would be set by the
> server, and all clients would dutifully add it to replies going to the
> mailing list. So then the reply could be sent directly, not through the
> server and everything would still work.
Sorry, but the Mail-Servers AND mutt plus some others do already
the right thing. I have "Reply", 2Group-Reply" and "List-Reply".
And all thre have the right behaviour...
If you use a broken Mail-Client, maybe it is time for you to get a
better one or ask its Upstream/Developer to add the missing feature.
> The reality is, this is a world far from perfect. Reply-To munging is
> the only way to keep things consistent across the board, no matter
Wrong, since IF I want to send a PM, I have to edit the message
and this bother me since I have to send over 50 PM's per day
byside 20-80 List-Messages.
> what's the client or the server. If things get better (more
> standardized) with email software then fine, stop tweaking the stupid
> header.
This is wrong, since if Mail-Servers to this BS, no Mail-Client
Author/Upstream/Developer will change the current behaviour...
They have not a minimum on motivation.
Greetings
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Attachment:
signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
