return add_recipients_for_address_list (message, config, type, list);
}
-/* Some mailing lists munge the Reply-To header despite it being A Bad
- * Thing, see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
- *
- * This function detects such munging so that reasonable headers can be
- * generated anyway. Returns 1 if munged, else 0.
- *
- * The current logic is fairly naive, Reply-To is diagnosed as munged if
- * it contains exactly one address, and this address is also present in
- * the To or Cc fields.
+/* Does the address in the Reply-To header of 'message' already appear
+ * in either the 'To' or 'Cc' header of the message?
*/
static int
-mailing_list_munged_reply_to (notmuch_message_t *message)
+reply_to_header_is_redundant (notmuch_message_t *message)
{
const char *header, *addr;
InternetAddressList *list;
const char *from_addr = NULL;
unsigned int i;
- /* When we have detected Reply-To munging, we ignore the Reply-To
- * field (because it appears in the To or Cc headers) and use the
- * From header so that person will get pinged and will actually
- * receive the response if not subscribed to the list. Note that
- * under no circumstances does this fail to reply to the address in
- * the Reply-To header.
+ /* Some mailing lists munge the Reply-To header despite it being A Bad
+ * Thing, see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
+ *
+ * The munging is easy to detect, because it results in a
+ * redundant reply-to header, (with an address that already exists
+ * in either To or Cc). So in this case, we ignore the Reply-To
+ * field and use the From header. Thie ensures the original sender
+ * will get the reply even if not subscribed to the list. Note
+ * that the address in the Reply-To header will always appear in
+ * the reply.
*/
- if (mailing_list_munged_reply_to (message)) {
+ if (reply_to_header_is_redundant (message)) {
reply_to_map[0].header = "from";
reply_to_map[0].fallback = NULL;
}