From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 01:55 on 17 Oct 2007 Subject: mutt list-reply and lists with multiple address Sorry for the dupes everyone. I can't figure out why mutt feels the need to put both list addresses in To: when I hit list-reply, and I don't know how to give it a dose of sanity. Hate. Regards,
From: Timothy Knox Date: 02:02 on 17 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: mutt list-reply and lists with multiple address Somewhere on Shadow Earth, at Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 02:55:01AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > Sorry for the dupes everyone. I can't figure out why mutt feels > the need to put both list addresses in To: when I hit list-reply, > and I don't know how to give it a dose of sanity. Hate. Curious. List-reply just worked fine for me (I hope, anyway). At least, I only see the list address once in the headers. We'll see. ;-)
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 03:11 on 17 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: mutt list-reply and lists with multiple address * Timothy Knox <tdk@xxxxxxxx.xxx> [2007-10-17 03:05]: > Curious. List-reply just worked fine for me (I hope, anyway). > At least, I only see the list address once in the headers. I have `subscribe`d both addresses, so that list-reply may work when replying to mail sent through either gateway. I don't know which headers mutt is looking at, but it must be looking at more than the ones that list-reply is documented to check, because those contain only the hate@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx address in several of the mails where mutt put both addresses in the recipient line. The hates-software@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx address is mentioned only in delivery and mailing list headers and such that should, per docs, not be getting consulted. Regards,
From: Richard Clamp Date: 08:49 on 17 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: mutt list-reply and lists with multiple address On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 04:11:03AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > I don't know which headers mutt is looking at, but it must be > looking at more than the ones that list-reply is documented to > check, because those contain only the hate@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx > address in several of the mails where mutt put both addresses in > the recipient line. > > The hates-software@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx address is mentioned only > in delivery and mailing list headers and such that should, per > docs, not be getting consulted. You have that backwards. The canonical list address is hates-software@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx, that's why all the machinery in play refers to that. hate@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx was added as an alias one day as a convenient posting address when someone suggested it to me. I was probably drinking at the time.
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 19:25 on 17 Oct 2007 Subject: Re: mutt list-reply and lists with multiple address * Richard Clamp <richardc@xxxxxxxxx.xxx> [2007-10-17 09:55]: > The canonical list address is > hates-software@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx, that's why all the > machinery in play refers to that. Aha, I guess that means hates-software@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx will always get a mention in headers that mutt consults for list-reply, so if I drop the `subscribe hate@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx` directive then list-reply to suchly addressed mails will continue to work but will no longer produce dupes. Cool. The remaining hate is mutt being underdocumented in this regard. Regards,
Generated at 10:25 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi