Re: Transparent reply-to-mailing-list for broken mailers

2009-09-06 Thread Paul Johnson
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:10 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > In <1251868974.4290.6.ca...@paddington.network.ursamundi.org>, Paul Johnson > wrote: > >On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 16:53 -0600, ghe wrote: > >> FORMAIL=/usr/bin/formail > >> > >> :0Hfhw > >> > >> * ^Return-Path: > >> > >> | $FORMAIL -i

Re: Transparent reply-to-mailing-list for broken mailers

2009-09-02 Thread Rakotomandimby Mihamina
09/02/2009 05:10 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.: It's not transparent. It's rare, but some users do actually set the Reply-To header (and expect you to use it); this trumps their setting irrecoverably. Hitting "Reply-To-List" is natural when you want to reply to a list... I dont understand the nee

Re: Transparent reply-to-mailing-list for broken mailers

2009-09-02 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
In <1251868974.4290.6.ca...@paddington.network.ursamundi.org>, Paul Johnson wrote: >On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 16:53 -0600, ghe wrote: >> FORMAIL=/usr/bin/formail >> >> :0Hfhw >> >> * ^Return-Path: >> >> | $FORMAIL -i "Reply-To: " >> >> (Note that my name is in the Return-Path.) >> >> No addy editing,