Re: [tlug] getting decent behaviour when hitting 'r' on tlug-mails in mutt

[Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>]

On 2010-01-10 13:04 +0100 (Sun), Christian Horn wrote:

>   macro index X '<reply>n<enter>'
> now does an alternate reply taking the right address.
> ...
> Yes, i get the better behaviour now but have to run a different key for
> the tlug-reply, so have a different workflow for that mailinglist.

Right. However, there are things called "hooks" that can change your mutt
configuration on the fly:

  http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#hooks

In particular, there's a "reply-hook" that appears to let you run arbitrary
commands when you reply to a message:

  http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#reply-hook

Now, I would guess that changing the key bindings at this point won't help,
since you already used the previously set binding to initiate the reply. But,

On 2010-01-10 15:28 +0100 (Sun), Tobias Diedrich wrote:

] set ignore_list_reply_to="yes"

So I'm guessing you could have a default reply-hook that sets this
to "no," and a reply-hook for TLUG messages that sets this to "yes",
and that should I believe take effect before the reply addresses are
determined.

Please let us know if you play with this and have some success, or fail
(and with the configuration that failed), or if you decide not to pursue
this.

On 2010-01-10 13:04 +0100 (Sun), Christian Horn wrote:

> Thats the policits-part i dont bring up, but will read up now why 
> settings are like this.  

As far as I can tell, it's because the admins don't want replies to
the messages they send coming back to both their address and the list
address by default (which is perfectly reasonable), but don't know how
to set Reply-to on messages they send, so they decided just to tweak a
global list setting that changes the header for everybody else, too.

Note that you ask for a "decent setting" when replying to messages here,
but you can't really have one on this list.

The sender of a reply of course has ultimate control over to which
addresses it's sent. However, it makes sense that the default set of
reply addresses should be chosen by the author of the message, who knows
best the content of the message and his own preferences for a copy
directly to his address. RFC 2822 e-mail has a way of encoding these
author preferences, and that's the Reply-to header (or From/To/Cc when
one is not present).

Unfortunately, you have no way of telling what the author really wanted
because the list hides that from you. (I believe I've seen it go so far
as to change messages where I'd specified a private reply by default
to have a public reply by default.) So really, you can't know if the
different default reply behaviour you want (replying to the author and
the list addresses) is "reasonable" or not.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson         <cjs@example.com>         +81 90 7737 2974
             http://www.starling-software.com
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it.    --George Bernard Shaw