From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Change in rmail-reply Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:16 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20090128.002236.153267880.hanche@math.ntnu.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1233241770 26829 80.91.229.12 (29 Jan 2009 15:09:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:09:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Harald Hanche-Olsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 29 16:10:43 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LSYWs-0003Kp-BK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:10:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57621 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSYVa-0001YI-3b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSYVC-0001M1-TK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:23 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSYVB-0001L7-33 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34841 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSYVA-0001Ky-QL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:20 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:21905 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LSYV8-000795-Sz; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:19 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag4FACBVgUnO+LLC/2dsb2JhbACBbspihBAGgkU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,344,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="32972776" Original-Received: from 206-248-178-194.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.178.194]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2009 10:08:17 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 81D707F9B; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:08:16 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Richard M. Stallman's message of "Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:32:18 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108359 Archived-At: > Can anyone present an argument in support of what the RFC says? I'm not sure exactly what is the purpose of this discussion: all MUAs other than Rmail (AFAIK) ignore "resent-(to|cc)" when replying to a message, which is why systems like debbugs don't work harder to hide the intermediate email address and leave it in "resent-to". So, I don't think it's worthwhile to try and figure out what the RFC says, meant to say, or should say. Stefan