[Users] That won't work.

[Dave Howorth]

On Sun, 11 Oct 2020 13:08:11 -0400
Little Girl <littlergirl at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey there,
> 
> claws at dragony.name wrote:
> >> Paul wrote:  
>    
> >> >One option is to use a Template.  
> 
> [SNIP]
> 
> >> Perfect! Thanks for a quick solution [virtual hug].  
> 
> >Unfortunately that does not work reliably. Imagine you have
> >
> >To: your at mail.com, another at person.com
> >
> >You will then put "your at mail.com, another at person.com" into the new
> >from-field, which is not what you want.  
> 
> Yep, I noticed that when replying to this mailing list, which often
> has more than one addressee listed. In that case, you might still need
> to manually intervene and delete the extra address(es).

That to me has always been the most significant problem (i.e. scope for
enhancement) with this solution. It's annoying to have to remember that
you have to check every reply to make sure it's sane.

> There's also the issue of mailing list mails being addressed to a
> group rather than an individual. When replying to this message,
> for example, it was addressed to users at claws-mail.org and the template
> put that into the "From:" field of this reply, so I manually changed
> it.

Not a problem for me, because I sort all the mailing lists I'm
subscribed to into individual folders, and then I have templates set
for replies in those folders.

I haven't tried to now set a top-level %to template, because I'm
worried what happens to already established folder-level templates if I
do. Does a folder-level template override a higher-level folder or
top-level template, or what? Anybody know?

BTW, I tried to send an email to myself with a quoted naughty command
appended to the address. It failed with an SMTP error without reaching
even my ISP - ** error occurred on SMTP session
*** Error occurred while sending the message:
501 ... malformed address ...

If anybody thinks they could send me such a malformed address, please
do so. Please cc me as well so I can see you tried. (I'd rather you
didn't use an actual rm command just in case you succeed :)