[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)

Subject: Re: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)
From: Martin-Eric Racine <q-funk@pp.fishpool.fi>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:29:46 +0200
Cc: mint@fishpool.com
In-reply-to: <19991121151927.B290@tubul.dascon.de>
Sender: owner-mint@fishpool.com

On 21.11.1999, Michael Schwingen <rincewind@discworld.dascon.de> wrote:

> > Pine always asks if I wanna reply to From or Reply-To, so who's
> > got an indecent MUA here?
> 
> RFC822 indicates that replies shall be sent to the reply-to
> address if present, so why should the MUA ask me about that?

If the RFC itself says "_do_ use Reply-To if found" then why are
we having this discussion?  Let's implement Reply-To and get it
over with.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Martin-Éric Racine            The Atari Stacy and TT030 Homepage
Lappeenranta, Finland          http://members.tripod.com/~TT030/
----------------------------------------------------------------
   "When the time comes, I will know and I shall be."  Q-Funk

References:
- Re: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)
  - From: Michael Schwingen <rincewind@discworld.dascon.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)
Next by Date: Re: [MiNT] MP and TT
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)
Next by thread: RE: [MiNT] List policies (was: Pine 4.20)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread