--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <jani@nikula.org>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BFF431FB6\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:48 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id Q37ev5DBT4P4 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:42 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com (mail-lb0-f174.google.com\r
+ [209.85.217.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99571431FAE\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:42 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r10so5649795lbi.5\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:41 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;\r
+ d=google.com; s=20120113;\r
+ h=x-received:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date\r
+ :message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-gm-message-state;\r
+ bh=CxKdxW/cHVKElXxiK5SNdNhyVBl9MPQbBaqXiTU05VE=;\r
+ b=oCrRY1Fi5ERQKqkSZIADsHT1aaWYqsT66lPcrZDCijvENfGKU2C3zWD3VgHLM5K2w/\r
+ narYlrVRaqmbPRJX3PeqdCG7PVRgRuVvKsl1pJnLciy0U1tZO5q9OZrk1dO9CFtboHUL\r
+ UYm5Xv/LtolpRQJfNlnx2JZTunblDmQadc2C4MAmVonJ5AgxiFqzqL9qFdBXX2jvL049\r
+ pASikafMkCxknbZfabAzFEXN90yHjnpShAgvjSQuJ6rM3jqD82tOlMMq5gBP9bPLCQ39\r
+ GHkeR0vI16UvO9XFGShmSmuNsMuHdRSQKRG9q4TrFo29MJ+ySpqRmWtaRWO4qC7Ox5/a\r
+ lcnA==\r
+X-Received: by 10.152.120.40 with SMTP id kz8mr11806922lab.30.1368392021086;\r
+ Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:41 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from localhost (dsl-hkibrasgw2-58c376-211.dhcp.inet.fi.\r
+ [88.195.118.211])\r
+ by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id c5sm3408997lbe.1.2013.05.12.13.53.39\r
+ for <multiple recipients>\r
+ (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);\r
+ Sun, 12 May 2013 13:53:40 -0700 (PDT)\r
+From: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>\r
+To: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Allow widen reply\r
+In-Reply-To: <1368303344-13713-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+References: <1368303344-13713-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+87~gc69f540 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 23:53:37 +0300\r
+Message-ID: <878v3japim.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-Gm-Message-State:\r
+ ALoCoQm+eE1k/xFZ2AeZAqmpZ+uflulhz31wbCbEOSWZo0JM1bb4WCe4wHson6YeqE2f5xdZsDmC\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 20:53:48 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+Hi Mark -\r
+\r
+On Sat, 11 May 2013, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:\r
+> This is an initial draft of a patch to allow the emacs frontend to\r
+> "widen" the reply: i.e., change the headers to reply-to-all after a\r
+> reply-to-sender has been started.\r
+\r
+I didn't look at the patches very much, but I like the idea, a lot. This\r
+is the way it should be.\r
+\r
+> There are some things that need to be worked out: do we want to allow\r
+> narrowing the reply (ie going from reply-to-all back to\r
+> reply-to-sender)? I did not implement this as it was slightly easier\r
+> not to, message-mode doesn't have this by default, and it's easy for a\r
+> user to remove recipients.\r
+\r
+Might be useful, but can be added later on.\r
+\r
+The same for better handling of mail-followup-to: and reply-to:. For\r
+those, I'm not sure if a keybinding for "widening" the recipients is the\r
+right choice, as they both mean *changing*, not necessarily widening the\r
+recipient list. Maybe you can come up with an approach here that extends\r
+well to those too later on. ;)\r
+\r
+BR,\r
+Jani.\r