[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: |
Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:11:29 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 11:47:45PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
When you have M-F-T, List-* is a very poor substitute.
And even without it, a little muttrc magic means that mutt doesn't
_need_ List-* headers.
I should not have to edit .muttrc for every single mailing list I reply
to, especially when the List-* headers are very informative. Anything
that makes me do unnecessary work is broken and wrong.
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
pgpOYCaazdj82.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [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, 2003/08/22
- [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, 2003/08/22
- [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 <=
- 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
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Miles Bader, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Robert Collins, 2003/08/27
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Miles Bader, 2003/08/27
- [Gnu-arch-users] Specifying protocols [was: the dangers of no reply-to munging], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/08/27