[linux-elitists] Replying to a List and another Recipient [was Re: Petitition for Nvidia to Release Open-Source Drivers]
Wed Nov 9 19:27:16 PST 2005
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 02:40:02PM -0600, Jerry Cooperstein wrote:
>On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 12:21 -0800, Teh Entar-Nick wrote:
>> begin Shlomi Fish quotation:
>> > A completely nazi measurement for a complete non-issue and even
>> > anti-issue.
>> Okay, I realize you're Israeli, but do you think you could chill out a
>> little on comparing Don's mailing list configuration with the Holocaust?
>Agreed...It's a rule of thumb that once the Nazi or
>Fascist reference is made it shows discussion is over.
Accept this is clearly an example of Quirk's Exception to Godwin's Law.
So I may as well throw in, the use of the Mail-Followup-To:
header. I don't see an rfc for it but it is widely used and
accepted to denote if an author wants cc of list postings,
Mutt supports it natively, unfortunately *some* people misconfigure
their clients to request cc via the Mail-Followup-To in the same
messages they complain about getting cc.
when you list reply mutt determines if it recognizes a list in
the to field (not sure why cc field is not also checked for list),
if the address matches the list or subscribe regex in muttrc; a
list reply not in the subscribe regex gets the senders address
in the Mail-Followup-To field, _so_ list subscribers know to cc
the sender. if the list address matches the subscribe regex the
poster's address does not go in Mail-Followup-To, because he
presumably follows the list and doesn't want cc from everyone who
of course the sender and list admin can do anything they want.
Now to configure a no bcc hook for messages I send to lists ;)
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <IXOYE><
http://galis.org/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the linux-elitists