Re: [Evolution] Group reply for mailing lists

[Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc cu-portland edu>]

On 12 Jan 2001 17:14:05 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> Dan? What do you think?
>
> I guess we could use them in the Reply-To-All. *shrug*

RFC2369 specifies all of the jazz that MLMs are supposed to put into the
headers.  I would also like to see "reply to group" separate from "reply
to all", as they're not the same.  Reply to all goes to everybody listed
on to or cc, while reply to group goes only to the group.  

    Greg

> On 12 Jan 2001 20:34:51 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On 11 Jan 2001 19:59:47 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > > I don't think anyone is working on this - is this even a standard??
> >
> >
> > I am wondering if the feature should be a separate type of reply to
> > ("Reply to List/Group" as I have it now) or if the standard "reply all"
> > should use these headers if available.
> >
> > I went with the reply to list as a separate option, but the cr.yp.to
> > website I mentioned earlier seems to suggest it should be a part of the
> > reply to all function.
> >
> > What is the preference of the evolution team?