1 |
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 22:10:40 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:40:39 +0200 |
3 |
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > On 16-06-2016 19:37:55 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
6 |
> > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:52:32 +0200 |
7 |
> > > Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
> > > |
9 |
> > > > On 16-06-2016 16:37:10 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
10 |
> > > > > > P.S. Please don't CC me when replying to my e-mails on the list, |
11 |
> > > > > > since I'm already subscribed to the list. |
12 |
> > > > > |
13 |
> > > > > Please don't expect others to keep blacklists of people who can't |
14 |
> > > > > handle their mail properly, or to generally harm others and ignore good |
15 |
> > > > > practices because you can't handle your mail. |
16 |
> > > > |
17 |
> > > > You mean ignoring the Reply-To header is "good practice"? |
18 |
> > > |
19 |
> > > It's not being ignored, as you can see by the occurrence of the mailing |
20 |
> > > list in CC. |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > From RFC 5322: |
23 |
> > |
24 |
> > When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the address(es) to |
25 |
> > which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. In the |
26 |
> > absence of the "Reply-To:" field, replies SHOULD by default be sent to |
27 |
> > the mailbox(es) specified in the "From:" field unless otherwise |
28 |
> > specified by the person composing the reply. |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > In other words, you sent it to me, while I requested you to send it to |
31 |
> > the list. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> 'Suggests'. But if you insist, file a bug and stop bothering me. I'm |
34 |
> not maintaining nor developing any mail client. |
35 |
|
36 |
Claws mail definitely allows proper replies; just grep for |
37 |
X-Mailer header containing "Claws Mail" in this list and see how |
38 |
replies are made. |
39 |
|
40 |
It looks like that problem is in how client is configured. That's |
41 |
why we are borthering you :) |
42 |
|
43 |
Best regards, |
44 |
Andrew Savchenko |