Re: Setting Reply-To: In elm?

Article View: netcom.general

Article #6

From: Tim Pierce
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 00:43

21 lines
1530 bytes

In article <1992Nov2.200744.20467@netcom.com> westes@netcom.com (Will Estes) writes:

>By not parsing the
>elmheaders file, you allow the user to both include a Reply-To: in
>elmheaders, and to specify a different Reply-To: through the elm
>interactive interface.  As a result, the outgoing mail has multiple
>Reply-To: fields to different addresses, and that is probably a
>semantically meaningless (or at least ambiguous) condition.

And misleading.  The convention for interfaces like these is that
run-time modifications (such as a change to the message header via the
'h' command) override any compiled-in defaults or any rc files, such
as elm/elmheaders.  If this is what elm actually does with elmheaders,
combine it with the fact that it uses the last Reply-To or From field
in the header, and the result is that a remote reader using Elm will
reply to the address specified in elmheaders.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /

Technical Details

Message-ID: <Bx47C0.D43@unix.amherst.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!caen!nic.umass.edu!news.amherst.edu!twpierce

References: <1992Nov2.010544.10279@netcom.com> <1992Nov2.140213.9851@DSI.COM> <1992Nov2.200744.20467@netcom.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: netcom.general,comp.mail.elm
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!caen!nic.umass.edu!news.amherst.edu!twpierce
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Setting Reply-To: In elm?
Message-ID: <Bx47C0.D43@unix.amherst.edu>
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
References: <1992Nov2.010544.10279@netcom.com> <1992Nov2.140213.9851@DSI.COM> <1992Nov2.200744.20467@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 00:43:11 GMT
Lines: 21

Reply to Parent Message