From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Changes for emacs 28 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:32:35 +0300 Message-ID: <838sdhk8ho.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20200906133719.cu6yaldvenxubcqq.ref@Ergus> <20200906133719.cu6yaldvenxubcqq@Ergus> <83lfhnnew7.fsf@gnu.org> <20200906163418.3p2wuygb4osm76wa@Ergus> <20200906203807.u237c3h22oxwtmba@Ergus> <87tuwabm5a.fsf@gnus.org> <9fb02447-6189-490f-a6ee-3d037492e0e6@default> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10763"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ghe@sdf.org, larsi@gnus.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 10 16:33:12 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kGNdO-0002dz-QT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:33:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35232 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGNdN-0002G2-Pd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:33:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53956) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGNco-0001qF-Tc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:32:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:59791) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kGNco-0008JF-Gh; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:32:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3881 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kGNck-0003wc-1S; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:32:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Robert Pluim on Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:52:49 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:255003 Archived-At: > From: Robert Pluim > Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:52:49 +0200 > Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Drew Adams , > Emacs developers > > Gregory> Indeed. I know this, but I don't know why this is the case (*). I > Gregory> used to explicitly set Reply-To to emacs-devel@gnu.org in my MUA, but > Gregory> Eli asked me to stop to do this. > > I think in that case rmail replies only to emacs-devel@, which means > Eli has to add back the other recipients. Eli, do we need a "reply to > 'From+To+CC+Reply-To'" feature in rmail? ("wide reply" in Gnus parlance). I don't think I understand what that means (never used Gnus, sorry), and don't remember the details of the issue. But in general, why would someone need to set Reply-To to the list address when replying to a message from the list? It should be automatic in any sensible MUA, no?