From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Teemu Likonen Subject: Mutt and Mail-Followup-To Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 09:26:05 +0300 Message-ID: <20080531062605.GA3029@mithlond.arda.local> References: <20080530140447.GB10514@leksak.fem-net> <7vy75rh25i.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080531024027.GB5907@leksak.fem-net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Stephan Beyer X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat May 31 08:27:37 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K2KYs-0007ax-Pg for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 31 May 2008 08:27:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751119AbYEaG0L (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 02:26:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751100AbYEaG0K (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 02:26:10 -0400 Received: from mta-out.inet.fi ([195.156.147.13]:60123 "EHLO jenni1.rokki.sonera.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751098AbYEaG0J (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 02:26:09 -0400 Received: from mithlond.arda.local (80.220.180.181) by jenni1.rokki.sonera.fi (8.5.014) id 483E82F1001750D0; Sat, 31 May 2008 09:26:20 +0300 Received: from dtw by mithlond.arda.local with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1K2KXV-0000rL-UM; Sat, 31 May 2008 09:26:05 +0300 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080531024027.GB5907@leksak.fem-net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Stephan Beyer wrote (2008-05-31 04:40 +0200): > Oh, it was not meant to be rude. In fact, I didn't even knew that my > mutt generates it. ;) So I deactivated it and I hope it helps you to > enjoy your Caipirinha. > > Btw, I'm confused whether I should use "List reply" (which only > replies to git@vger.kernel.org) or "Reply to all" (which I used now). > While on some other mailinglists it is discouraged to "reply to all", > it seems to be the common case here. Mutt's logic is pretty complicated on this. If followup_to=yes, then Mutt generates M-F-T field and puts all the addresses gathered from To and CC fields there (minus user's own). In addition to that, if there's a mailing list address which is in users's "subscribe" list Mutt will not add users's own address to the M-F-T. If the list address is only in "lists" list, Mutt will add users's own address. The intention is to prevent duplicates when user is a subscriber, and to get private replies if user is not a subscriber. The logic is so complicated and not very well supported so it doesn't work well anyway. I think the best thing to do is: set followup_to=no set honor_followup_to=ask-no One just has to find out if the list in question favours "replies to all" (the 'g' key in Mutt) or replies to the list only ('L' in Mutt).