[SC.LUG] Reply-to-list munging madness

[Richard Smedley]

On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 22:53 +0100, Simon Ward wrote:
> I don’t agree with reply-to munging one bit, because it is a hack for
> the deficiency of software, but if it must go that way _my_ mail client
> can cope.

Hey, if we had to fall back to RFC1149 [1] and RFC 2549 [2] for
sending and receiving mail, then I'm sure mutt would trundle on
unaffected ;-)

 - Richard

[1] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549