[imp] Feature request - "reply to list"

[Edward Glowacki]

On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 16:33, Jan Schneider wrote:
> Zitat von Edward Glowacki <glowack2@msu.edu>:
> 
> > During a discussion on our local LUG list[1], I came up with what I
> > think are the three logical commands for replying to messages:
> > 
> > 1. Reply to sender
> > 2. Reply to list
> > 3. Reply to all
> > 
> > IMP only has 1. and 3., so I thought I should suggest adding 2. =)  
> > 
> > [1]  Under the thread "reply to" at:
> > http://www.egr.msu.edu/archives/public/linux-user/2002-May/thread.html
> 
> Yes, that's a good idea, we already discussed about it. Patch?
> 
> Jan.

I started working on it, but got stumped trying to determine how to make
such a feature reliable.  After looking at the headers of several
different mailing list's messages, I couldn't find any way (or
combination of ways) to pull out a list address so that it works every
time.  I thought Evolution seemed to do a good job, until I tried "reply
to list" to your message and found Evolution trying to send my mail to
myself! =P  

In that discussion on the LUG list that I referenced, I suggested that
all mailing list software conform to a (non-existent, one would need to
be created) standard method of 1. flagging a message as being sent to a
list and 2. providing the address of that list.  That's the only
reliable way I can see to get the list reply to work.  But if several
major mailing list programs could use such a standard, ALL email clients
would be able to trivially implement a reliable "reply to list" feature.

Seems like the only option in the meantime is to have a series of
detection functions for each major mailing list software to try to pull
out the list, but IMHO that's a Bad Idea (read: "A huge mess to
implement and maintain").


-- 
Edward Glowacki			glowack2@msu.edu
Michigan State University	
"...a partial solution to the right problem is better than a complete
solution to the wrong one." (http://uiweb.com/issues/issue14.htm)