Subject: Reply To All Recipients Problem

From: Larry Tai <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1993 11:43:36 -0700 (PDT)

We are running Pine 3.07 on DECStations 5000s under Ultrix 4.3a.  We seem to
be having a problem with the "Reply TO All Recipients?" feature.

The "Reply To All Recipients? (y/n)" prompt always comes on even when the
original message was sent to only one recipient.  Can some one shed some
light on this?

Thanks in advance.

---------
 US-Mail:  Larry Tai, 2120A Wickson, Statistical Laboratory
           UC Davis, Davis, Ca. 95616
  E-Mail:  [email-masked] or [email-masked]
     Tel:  (916)-752-6085

---

From: David L Miller <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1993 12:42:21 -0700 (PDT)

Pine 3.07 had some difficulties with the matching algorithm when 
comparing the recipients of the message with the sender of the reply.  If 
you reply to a message directed only to you and answer yes to "Reply To 
All Recipients? (y/n)", you should see your name in the cc: header.

This problem is fixed in Pine 3.85.  Unless something crops up in the 
next few minutes, we will start packaging Pine 3.86 this afternoon.

|\ |  |\/|  David L. Miller    [email-masked]  (206) 685-6240
|/ |_ |  |  Software Engineer, Pine Development Team   (206) 685-4045 (FAX)
University of Washington, Networks & Distributed Computing
4545 15th Ave NE, Seattle WA 98105, USA

---

From: Erik Lawaetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1993 10:11:17 +0100 (MET)

> All Recipients? (y/n)", you should see your name in the cc: header.

One additional feature available in elm would be very helpful.

In my elmrc file I had:

  # alternative addresses that I could receive mail from (usually a #
  forwarding mailbox) and don't want to have listed...  
  alternatives =[email-masked] [email-masked]
          [email-masked] [email-masked]
          [email-masked]

which helped persuade elm not to include these addresses in replies to all
recipients. 

--Erik

---

From: Barry Cornelius <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1993 18:29:00 +0100 (BST)

> which helped persuade elm not to include these addresses in replies to all

I have never sent the Pine people any wish list for Pine.  However, this
is one that I have been meaning to send them for the last 4 months: it is
the one that would top our wish list. 

Whenever you release a new version of Pine, I modify the code so that it
understands the mailnames that are used at the University of Durham.  For
example, although my username is dcl0bjc and this message is being sent
from vega.dur.ac.uk, my e-mail address is [email-masked]. 
So, I want to be able to include something in my .pinerc that will tell
Pine that messages addressed to the address [email-masked]
and [email-masked] are references to me. 

Is this the issue addressed by the "alternatives" variable of elm?  If so,
could we please, please, please have it in one of the next non-maintenance
releases of Pine. 

--
Barry Cornelius                            Durham (091 or +44 91) 374 4717
Information Technology Service,                IT Service Office: 374 2892
University of Durham, Durham.                                Fax: 374 3741
DH1 3LE, UK                           E-mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Steve Hubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1993 11:10:20 -0700 (PDT)

The alternatives variable sounds like something we could do.  (We have to 
evaluate the idea and think about it and blah, blah, blah first, of 
course.)  To the best of my recollection, you are the first two people 
who've ever requested such a feature, but now that you mention it, it 
does seem like a feature that many mailers have.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Steve Hubert <[email-masked]>
Networks and Distributed Computing, Univ. of Washington, Seattle

---

From: Laurie Cuthbert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1993 17:40:28 +0100 (BST)

I would support this idea -

Internally to the dept my mail is generated as [email-masked], but 
changed to [email-masked] at the site mailer. Replying to 
external mail therefore always includes my own name on the list when I 
choose the "all recipients" option with pine.

Regards

Laurie Cuthbert

---

From: Oved Ben-Aroya <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1993 12:23:35 +0200 (EET)

> does seem like a feature that many mailers have.  Thanks for the suggestion.

BSD mail, elm and mush all have this variable.

--
\Oved

---

From: Philip Hazel <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 09:22:34 +0100 (BST)

> I would support this idea -

So would I! It's one of the few Elm features I miss in Pine.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel                   University Computing Service,
[email-masked]             New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
[email-masked]          England.  Phone: +44 223 334714

---

From: [email-masked] (M. Dimou-Zacharova)
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1993 09:49:23 +0100 (MET)

If I may say I had sent a similar request last July where I wrote:
>>To: [email-masked]
>>Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1993 12:15:55 +0200 (MET DST)
>>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>>
>>I really like the 'use-only-domain-name' feature. This however can make
>>the username@domainonly unrepliable if the directory service which resolves
>>such addresses is based on personalname@domainonly.
>>e.g. for user Brian Carpenter with computer registered username 'brian'
>>the address [email-masked] is valid
>>as well as the address [email-masked] but not [email-masked].

I had gotten the following answer by David Miller then but I still beg
for a solution to this problem because my users are really agressive on this:

>>The use-only-domain feature really assumes that the username is
>>consistent across the domain.  Pine  4.0 will probably allow you to add a
>>reply-to header, but other than that, I don't know any way to resolve
>>your problem at the Pine level.

Thanks very much in advance for considering this
 -maria