On Sun, 03 Mar 2013, Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat,  2 Mar 2013 21:55:21 +0200, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> wrote:
>> Use Mail-Followup-To header to determine recipients according to
>> http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html if configured and present in the
>> message being replied to.
>
> I would like to see an option to --reply-to=list that, as far as
> possible, does the right thing.  If we had that, do we need
> reply.honor_followup_to?

If you look at http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html, it talks about *two*
response functions, which correspond to our --reply-to=sender and
--reply-to=all. The idea is to amend reply-all to honor Mail-Followup-To
header if it is present in the mail being replied to. I don't think the
interface should be more complicated than that.

I have added the reply.honor_followup_to configuration because, although
widely used, it's not a standard, and therefore some people might not
like to respect that. Although I'd argue if the sender of the message
has added that header, it's the sender's wish it should be respected.

If people think our reply-all should always and unconditionally respect
Mail-Followup-To if it's present, I'd be happy to throw out the config
option. It's ugly.

BR,
Jani.


PS. Please note that this is only the part that supports the
Mail-Followup-To header when replying to incoming mail that has it;
adding it to outgoing mail is beyond the scope here.