|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Re: [OT] Re vs R (WAS: Question about relay_domains)
From: Magnus Bäck (magnus
dsek.lth.se)
Date: Sat Dec 09 2006 - 15:39:31 CST
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 19:21 CET,
mouss <usebsd
free.fr> wrote:
> Gary V wrote:
>
> > At some point you also need to fix your MUA so it replies with
> > Re: or RE: and not R:
>
> This is a locale issue, and he is free to use whichever suits his
> country/job/... etc.
I believe the reply prefix "Re: " is mandated by an RFC and thus not
a locale issue. Either way, it's pretty obvious why it's a good idea
that everyone sticks to the same prefix.
But let's not start a holy war about this.
> > It messes up grouping in the mailing list archives.
>
> References and In-Reply-To headers should be enough to keep the thread
> structure.
Indeed, but his messages supply none of those headers.
--
Magnus Bäck
magnus
dsek.lth.se
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]