David Rogers schrieb: > * Jan Kohnert <nospam001-li...@jankoh.dyndns.org> [2010-08-31 06:22]: > >David Rogers schrieb: > >> * Michael Welsh Duggan <m...@md5i.com> [2010-08-30 18:04]: > >> >Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> writes: > >> >> Is there a reason that the reply-to header is not set for the mailing > >> >> list? > >> > > >> >Yes, there is a reason. > >> > > >> >http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > >> >http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.txt > >> > >> The logic at those links is impeccable but irrelevant. > > > >That are mail standards since 20+ years, if a MUA doesn't get it right, > >it's not the fault of the list. ;) > > True and still irrelevant.
OK, I don't like Flamewars, so I'll stop here. But one thing I have to add: You are using Mutt, according to your headers. Mutt in fact knows list-reply, at least according to [1]. So why not using this? That would solve all your problems. :) [1] http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-2.html -- MfG Jan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
