[OT] no Reply-To: header

[Gerrit]

Joolz wrote:
> This is not a fedora question, but her is goes...
> 
> Many people on this (and other) mailing list(s) don't use a "Reply-To:
> [list]". I use Mutt, is there a way to have Mutt use the To: address
> (not the From: address) when making a reply? Thanks!

Reply-To is bad. http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Summary:

Many people want to munge Reply-To headers. They believe it makes reply-to-list easier, and it encourages more list traffic. It really does neither, and is a very poor idea. Reply-To munging suffers from the following problems:

    * It violates the principle of minimal munging.
    * It provides no benefit to the user of a reasonable mailer.
    * It limits a subscriber's freedom to choose how he or she will direct a response.
    * It actually reduces functionality for the user of a reasonable mailer.
    * It removes important information, which can make it impossible to get back to the message sender.
    * It penalizes the person with a reasonable mailer in order to coddle those running brain-dead software.
    * It violates the principle of least work because complicates the procedure for replying to messages.
    * It violates the principle of least surprise because it changes the way a mailer works.
    * It violates the principle of least damage, and it encourages a failure mode that can be extremely embarrassing -- or worse.
    * Your subscribers don't want you to do it. Or, at least the ones who have bothered to read the docs for their mailer don't want you to do it. 

Gerrit.

-- 
Weather in Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, Netherlands 08/04 10:55:
	8.0°C showers in the vicinity; Cumulonimbus clouds observed mostly cloudy wind 6.7 m/s NNW (-2 m above NAP)
-- 
Experiences with Asperger's Syndrome:
	EN http://topjaklont.student.utwente.nl/english/
	NL http://topjaklont.student.utwente.nl/