Mail-Followup-To (was Re: IDEA License)

[Peter Lebbing]

On 27/03/13 14:40, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> I created it, as far as I recall, from my copy direct from Ulrich, 
> which had no Mail-Followup-To

Correct, the problem originated when you replied[1] to Werner's mail[2].
Werner's mail had the following header:

Mail-Followup-To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs at berklix.com>, gnupg-users at gnupg.org

The difference between that line and a simple Reply-to-All is that Werner would
be in the recipient list with the Reply-to-All, and not with the
Mail-Followup-To. Your reply should have only had gnupg-users at gnupg.org and your
manually added CC to Ulrich as recipients, since your MUA would conclude that
you don't need to CC yourself :).

> I'm familiar with Reply-to:  Not familar with Mail-Followup-To:
> What's the difference ?

Because Reply-To didn't really work out in practice for mailing lists, DJB came
up with two "non-canon" mail headers to remove ambiguity from the meaning of the
Reply-To header. He describes it in [3]. Not everybody agrees with his
view/solution, though.

Whether you like the headers Bernstein created or not, it would seem Werner
didn't want to be on the recipient list, which is why I brought it up in my PS.

HTH,

Peter.

[1]<http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-March/046339.html>
[2]<http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2013-March/046337.html>
[3]<http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html>

-- 
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>