On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 00:30:55 +0930, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 09:02 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > some of the fedora lists mung reply-to, I strip them out so that > > it doesn't break the reply function (which is only supposed to reply > > to the address(es) in the from header). > > Umm, no. That's NOT the case that it should ONLY reply to the from > header. It IS the case that in the absence of a reply-to header it uses > the from header, but where the reply-to header exists it should ONLY > reply to the reply-to header address(es). Do more reading about how > e-mail works... The context was reply to sender as opposed to reply to all or reply to list. > The reply-to header is an overriding instruction. Even when using reply to all or reply to list, it is only supposed to override the from header. So that if there is a reply-to header, reply to all should reply to addresses on the reply-to header and then cc header. > In general, you press reply to reply to a message, and your mail client > does what it's supposed to do (as I just outlined, above). A reply-all I disagree. In general you should use reply to all, and if you want to reply privately to the sender you should use reply. > feature is a special function for replying in an usual manner (one that > the message you're replying to hasn't been preset for). Such as > ignoring the reply-to override. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
