Hi,
I would like to discuss one feature, which I consider a bug. When doing a "reply to all" operation, I get included on the recipient list. In my opinion, this is not correct behavior: mail should be send to everyone _except_ the person who sends it.
What do you think?
Sincerely, Ondrej Zara _______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
Ondřej Žára wrote:
Hi,
I would like to discuss one feature, which I consider a bug. When doing a "reply to all" operation, I get included on the recipient list. In my opinion, this is not correct behavior: mail should be send to everyone _except_ the person who sends it.
What do you think?
+1 for me-too. i know that e.g. thunderbird behaves in a different way, but replying to me too is a feature i want quite frequently.
cheers, raoul
Ondřej Žára wrote:
Hi,
I would like to discuss one feature, which I consider a bug. When doing a "reply to all" operation, I get included on the recipient list. In my opinion, this is not correct behavior: mail should be send to everyone _except_ the person who sends it.
This is actually the case. In program/steps/mail/compose.inc on line 191 recipients that do match one of the user's identities are skipped.
Maybe you can debug this because it works for me.
~Thomas _______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
Hi,
I would like to discuss one feature, which I consider a bug. When doing a "reply to all" operation, I get included on the recipient list. In my opinion, this is not correct behavior: mail should be send to everyone _except_ the person who sends it.
This is actually the case. In program/steps/mail/compose.inc on line 191 recipients that do match one of the user's identities are skipped.
Maybe you can debug this because it works for me.
I found the following code near line 191:
// add recipent of original message if reply to all else if ($header=='cc' && !empty($MESSAGE->reply_all)) { if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->to) $fvalue .= $v;
if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->cc)
$fvalue .= (!empty($fvalue) ? ', ' : '') . $v;
}
First, the assignments in conditions are somewhat mystical to me (why?). Second, this clearly adds original recipient to a 'cc' part of new message. So, should I patch this only for myself or is this a newly found bug?
Sincerely, Ondrej Zara
List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
Ondrej Zara wrote:
This is actually the case. In program/steps/mail/compose.inc on line 191 recipients that do match one of the user's identities are skipped.
Maybe you can debug this because it works for me.
I found the following code near line 191:
// add recipent of original message if reply to all else if ($header=='cc' && !empty($MESSAGE->reply_all)) { if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->to) $fvalue .= $v;
if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->cc) $fvalue .= (!empty($fvalue) ? ', ' : '') . $v; }First, the assignments in conditions are somewhat mystical to me (why?). Second, this clearly adds original recipient to a 'cc' part of new message. So, should I patch this only for myself or is this a newly found bug?
Right but this list ($fvalue) is then checked later on.
However, it looks like this "bug" was introduced in http://trac.roundcube.net/changeset/1782 when attempting to fix http://trac.roundcube.net/ticket/1485337
I guess we could easily fix this by allowing "reply to myself" only in the to-field and not in CC where the reply-all problem occurs.
~Thomas _______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
Ondrej Zara wrote:
This is actually the case. In program/steps/mail/compose.inc on line 191 recipients that do match one of the user's identities are skipped.
Maybe you can debug this because it works for me.
I found the following code near line 191:
// add recipent of original message if reply to all else if ($header=='cc' && !empty($MESSAGE->reply_all)) { if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->to) $fvalue .= $v;
if ($v = $MESSAGE->headers->cc) $fvalue .= (!empty($fvalue) ? ', ' : '') . $v; }First, the assignments in conditions are somewhat mystical to me (why?). Second, this clearly adds original recipient to a 'cc' part of new message. So, should I patch this only for myself or is this a newly found bug?
Thomas Bruederli, 08.12.16 17:59:
Right but this list ($fvalue) is then checked later on.
However, it looks like this "bug" was introduced in http://trac.roundcube.net/changeset/1782 when attempting to fix http://trac.roundcube.net/ticket/1485337
I guess we could easily fix this by allowing "reply to myself" only in the to-field and not in CC where the reply-all problem occurs.
~Thomas
Did I get it right, you'd block a feature in order to fix a bug? IMHO this would lead to inconsistent behaviour. If one would like to CC itself won't get the message and wouldn't know why...
First, the assignments in conditions are somewhat mystical to me (why?). Second, this clearly adds original recipient to a 'cc' part of new message. So, should I patch this only for myself or is this a newly found bug?
Right but this list ($fvalue) is then checked later on.
However, it looks like this "bug" was introduced in http://trac.roundcube.net/changeset/1782 when attempting to fix http://trac.roundcube.net/ticket/1485337
I guess we could easily fix this by allowing "reply to myself" only in the to-field and not in CC where the reply-all problem occurs.
Well, I just want to know whether I should patch my version (because majority of users prefers to be cc-ed when "replying to all") or wait for a standard fixing procedure and then update my svn working copy :)
Ondrej _______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 20:39, Ondrej Zara ondras@zarovi.cz wrote:
Well, I just want to know whether I should patch my version (because majority of users prefers to be cc-ed when "replying to all") or wait for a standard fixing procedure and then update my svn working copy :)
I committed some changes that should fix this issue (without blocking a feature) Just get the latest SVN version of compose.inc and try it out.
~Thomas _______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
-
Horváth Balázs -
Ondrej Zara -
Ondřej Žára
-
Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] -
Thomas Bruederli