Re: Change in rmail-reply

[Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

     > As for fowarding, that is no substitute, since the new header does not
     > include the sender or other recipients of the original message.  When
     > you want to exclude them, forwarding is suitable.  Otherwise, it isn't.

    That's an issue with your MUA, if that is a common use case for you.

I do not follow.  What issue about the MUA are you raising?

     > Should we delete the rmail-resend command?

    No.  Better to rename it to something like rmail-bounce.

"Bounce" in the context of mail usually indicates report that a
message failed to reach a recipient.  Does this case have anything to
do with such a failure?  If not, what's the reason to suggest
using that word?

It occurs to me that maybe there should be two resend commands:
one which lets you edit the message and one which doesn't.
The former would be new.  It could insert CC commands
with the resend recipients, so you can either keep them or
delete them.