One of my users is complaining because digested messages have no Reply-To: header. He says the behaviour changed from 2.0 to 2.1. Is this change intentional?
"SP" == Simone Piunno firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>> Yes. Digest messages should never be replied to. Tell the >> user to burst his digests and reply to the individual messages. SP> Sorry, let me rephrase: this is what he wants to do! SP> He wants to reply to individual messages, but they lack the SP> Reply-To.
This is because RFC 1153 specifies the exact list of headers that should be copied to digest messages, and that list doesn't include Reply-To. OTOH, I think the list specified by RFC 1153 is incomplete (e.g. it doesn't include MIME headers), so adding Reply-To to the list of overrides seems fine to me.