From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Faylor To: overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com, mdejong@cygnus.com Subject: Re: Mail Header without the Reply-To line Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000 Message-id: <20000724110018.D1098@cygnus.com> References: <20000724052410.6025.qmail@daffy.airs.com> X-SW-Source: 2000/msg00837.html On Sun, Jul 23, 2000 at 10:24:10PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >The user points out that it would be easier to reply to the correct >address if we had a reply to field. > >Reply-To: sourcenav@sources.redhat.com > >I think it is a good idea. There is no reason to get two emails >everytime someone responds to a message you posted. > >Please see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html . Oops. I was looking forward to rereading this but the above URL doesn't work. I don't see an obvious typo there so I wonder if this page has vanished. cgf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Faylor To: overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com, mdejong@cygnus.com Subject: Re: Mail Header without the Reply-To line Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 08:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20000724110018.D1098@cygnus.com> References: <20000724052410.6025.qmail@daffy.airs.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q3/msg00128.html Message-ID: <20000724080000.bQbZVS9gF_Flr3WDPKGKEqj_pb7TEI7lLpXpuBHes4c@z> On Sun, Jul 23, 2000 at 10:24:10PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >The user points out that it would be easier to reply to the correct >address if we had a reply to field. > >Reply-To: sourcenav@sources.redhat.com > >I think it is a good idea. There is no reason to get two emails >everytime someone responds to a message you posted. > >Please see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html . Oops. I was looking forward to rereading this but the above URL doesn't work. I don't see an obvious typo there so I wonder if this page has vanished. cgf