Re: Reply-To header

[Brian Stafford <brian stafford uklinux net>]

On Wed, 20 February 11:32 Peter Bloomfield wrote:
> On 2002.02.20 05:57 Steffen Klemer wrote:
>> 
>> Am 2002.02.20 00:33 schrieb(en) Peter Bloomfield:
> [ snip ]
>>> Why not use `Reply to Group'?
>> 
>> I don't like that feature to much.
> 
> What's wrong with it? That's precisely what the `List-Post:' header is for! 
> Why make a guess based on the folder the message has found its way to, which 
> can be out of date even when it was once correct?

Not only that but it is a standards track feature, see RFC 2369.  So the 
question might be modified to "why make a guess when the standards describe 
what to do?"

<cynical>
Going by the reactions over the last year or so to every attempt to improve 
standards compliant behaviour in Balsa, I wonder at times why any of us bother 
trying.  It seems like users are far happier with any old crap that fails to 
interoperate reliably so long as the behaviour fits their particular prejudice 
about what is supposed to happen.
</cynical>

Brian