[linux-elitists] Mutt install 101

Nathaniel Smith njs@pobox.com
Tue Nov 11 23:49:49 PST 2003


On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:56:35PM -0800, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Michael Still (mikal@stillhq.com):
> 
> > I'm happy for you to have your own opinion. Then again, pine has served me 
> > well for close to a decade....
> 
> Except in your dismal failure to respect people's Mail-Followup-To
> headers.  Thus the _explicitly unwelcome_ offlist copies of your
> postings that have been littering my personal mailbox.  Are you going to
> quit doing that?

In defense of Pine, there are pretty good reasons to not support
Mail-Followup-To, namely the fact that it's not standardized, was
rejected from previous standardization efforts, and is reasonably
likely to screw up any later attempts to get this Right in a standard.

The Pine developers:
  http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&th=300d84522e787fe8&rnum=1
JWZ with some more background and opinion:
  http://web.archive.org/web/20020612023303/http://lists.ximian.com/archives/public/evolution-hackers/2001-February/002104.html
(and why in the world has ximian.com removed those archives?)

One could also argue that anything DJB is trying to create as a
unilateral standard must be wrong, but I won't be so uncharitable ;-).
( http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html )

Unfortunately, the whole reply-to-munging/mail-followup-to debate is a
horrible mess, in which both sides argue that they are somewhat less
wrong.  I wish it were otherwise...

None of which is to say that respecting the headers wouldn't be a
polite thing to do, being as the intention is clear and one's personal
choices do not create de facto standards.

-- Nathaniel

-- 
Eternity is very long, especially towards the end.
  -- Woody Allen



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list