[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging
From: |
Jonathan Walther |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:58:04 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 05:24:53PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Mail-Followup-To is all you need. Most people respect it these days;
the rest, you just flame until they do.
....and we just flame you back until you get a clue and use a MUA that
does the right thing with List-* instead of using a non-standard
header.
lists.debian.org is fairly easy, anyway: list-reply-only is clearly
spelt out everywhere.
Balogna. 'L' (list-reply-only) in mutt took one look at your message,
which contained all the List-* headers, and it said "No list found!"
Why are we expected to use bullshit software like this?
Jonathan
--
It's not true unless it makes you laugh,
but you don't understand it until it makes you weep.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Geek House Productions, Ltd.
Providing Unix & Internet Contracting and Consulting,
QA Testing, Technical Documentation, Systems Design & Implementation,
General Programming, E-commerce, Web & Mail Services since 1998
Phone: 604-435-1205
Email: address@hidden
Webpage: http://reactor-core.org
Address: 2459 E 41st Ave, Vancouver, BC V5R2W2
pgpYXl1kq7zNm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Anderson, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, markj, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Anderson, 2003/08/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, MJ Ray, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging,
Jonathan Walther <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Stig Brautaset, 2003/08/23
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Message not available
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/26