Julian H. Stacey
jhs at berklix.com
Wed Mar 27 14:40:18 CET 2013
Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 27/03/13 12:41, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > Thanks Ulrich for your email below,
> > It didn't make it to gnupg-users at gnupg.org & to
> > http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-March/date.html#end
> Posts by non-subscribers are moderated (held for approval by a moderator).
> That's why it took (by comparison) so long to make it to the list. It's there
> now, also in the web archive.
I replied using my private copy direct from Ulrich, waited for it
to arrive at gnupg web archive, edited wikipedia to point at my
archived copy, then Ulrich's copy to gnupg list arrived on list &
web archive, so I edited wikipedia again to point to his original
rather than my copy.
> PS: By the way, your e-mail client doesn't seem to honor the Mail-Followup-To
> header, because I spotted Werner Koch in the CC list. Just so you know.
I created it, as far as I recall, from my copy direct from Ulrich,
which had no Mail-Followup-To
Of the last 18 posts to this list, only 2 have header inc.
Both from Werner Koch.
I'm familiar with Reply-to: Not familar with Mail-Followup-To:
What's the difference ?
Don't know if my EXMH 2.7.2 or newer I'm upgrading to elsewhere might
or not do whatever it is that presumably it should.
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com
Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with "> ".
Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative.
More information about the Gnupg-users