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