Reply-to email lacks quoting of standard emailheaders
Categories
(MailNews Core :: Composition, enhancement)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
People
(Reporter: rene.fennet, Unassigned)
References
(Depends on 1 open bug, Blocks 3 open bugs)
Details
(Keywords: parity-Outlook, Whiteboard: [workaround: comment #61, #84])
Attachments
(1 file)
|
3.42 KB,
patch
|
mscott
:
review-
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Comment 1•22 years ago
|
||
Updated•22 years ago
|
Comment 2•22 years ago
|
||
Comment 3•22 years ago
|
||
Comment 6•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 7•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 8•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 9•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 10•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 11•21 years ago
|
||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Comment 12•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 13•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 14•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 15•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 16•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 17•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 18•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 19•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 20•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 21•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 22•20 years ago
|
||
| addon | ||
Comment 23•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 24•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 25•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 26•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 27•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 28•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 29•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 30•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 31•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 32•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 33•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 34•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 35•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 36•19 years ago
|
||
Comment 37•18 years ago
|
||
Comment 38•18 years ago
|
||
Comment 39•18 years ago
|
||
Updated•17 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Comment 44•17 years ago
|
||
| addon | ||
Comment 45•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 46•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 47•17 years ago
|
||
| addon | ||
Comment 48•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 49•17 years ago
|
||
| addon | ||
Comment 50•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 51•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 52•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 53•17 years ago
|
||
Comment 55•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 56•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 57•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 58•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 59•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 60•16 years ago
|
||
| addon | ||
Comment 61•16 years ago
|
||
| addon workaround | ||
Comment 62•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 64•15 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 65•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 66•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 67•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 69•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 70•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 72•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 73•14 years ago
|
||
Comment 74•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 75•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 76•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 77•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 78•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 79•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 80•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 81•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 82•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 83•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 84•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 85•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 86•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 87•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 88•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 89•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 91•1 year ago
|
||
based on comments above too numerous to cite
Comment 96•1 year ago
|
||
Having read some but not all! of the above conversation, I'd like to point out some in the thread have said that they or others won't use TB unless a full reply header format is available. Were it not for the add-on ReplyWithHeader, I would also not be using TB, as it is standard in business usage, and helpful in other usage.
The outlook-style reply header (From/date/to-subject-cc etc) may be overkill and semantically not a logically pure entity, but in the business world it is almost universal (save perhaps for Mac users), and generally used in most web mailers, or at least they have that option easily selectable. Mobile apps such as Bluemail have a per-account option on this.
In the end, if we want Thunderbird user base to grow, the lack of this feature (other than in an add-on whose existence and name are nor obvious) HAS and WILL put new users off. If you want more Thunderbird users, don't put them off by not providing what to them is a basic and familiar feature.
As to the semantics of needing the info in the Reply header, many a time I have been missing the necessary info, since someone in the middle of an email chain uses the basic header and I can't track properly what has been said by whom and to whom. So it's over-simplistic to say that "the original sender will (always) know."
The code is already there in the Forward header, so integrating it for Reply should be easy, and a simple "full or basic" Reply Header option added to Preferences.
Could we get this 22 year old issue resurrected and reconsidered? As I say, help build the user base by not putting them off with an unfamiliar change.
Thanks
Comment 97•1 year ago
|
||
(In reply to Felix Miata from comment #7)
The behavior of OE & Outlook here, like top posting, is another M$ scourge of
the internet, usurping well established behavior.
It is now today (2025) more well established than the old basic header. You may dislike MS, but if people are used to what they provide, why limit the acceptability of TB?
And as for:
Repeating the author email name & address in a reply makes no sense,
since it's duplicated precisely in the To: field. Repeating your own email
name and address is pure nonsense. Repeating the subject in the body
is redundant, since it too is duplicated in the Subject field. We already
have a way to include the timestamp of the message replied to
in the <wrote> line: (user_pref("mailnews.display.original_date", true);).
...all if this is semantically theoretically true, but in the real world email chains get really long and complex with extra people added in, people chop certain bits (often the old mails or some irrelevancies) of an email chain out and the history gets untraceable, people change the subject in the middle of an email chain, others in the email chain may not be able to see the allegedly "repeated" sender's email, and in a corporate environment there also needs to be as clear as possible an audit trail.
Those who propose the full header are not saying it should replace the basic one, just that they need the option, or they will be stuck with Outlook.
Let's not limit the much-needed uptake of TB after all the fine work currently being done.
Updated•4 months ago
|
Comment 98•3 months ago
|
||
I do not see any downside whatsoever to include this optionally in Thunderbird since it is a highly requested feature especially in a business environment for all of the reasons that people have stated above. It is what is generally considered to be "normal" behaviour from an email client.
These fields/headers are already included when forwarding a message in Thunderbird but inexplicably absent when replying to a message and there is no way to change that default behaviour that newcomers to the client would expect (or many veteran users would prefer)
These seemingly "small" things can be a major obstacle for people to adopt Thunderbird in a corporate environment and limit it's usage, which is a shame honestly because Thunderbird is one of the very few good open source email clients out there.
Thunderbird has nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain from adding this simple feature that has been requested in multiple bug reports since many years ago. Please keep in mind that most users won't bother to come here, create an account and submit a request like this. They would just see that there are no reply headers like they are used to and move on to a different client because their work requires it.
You can keep it as an option in the settings for people who prefer the old behaviour (i.e. no reply headers) so that whatever your preference or stance is on this matter, having the option to include them or not solves everyone's problems and makes it easier for newcomers to adopt it's use. It's a win-win situation and everybody is happy.
Kindly requesting that this feature be added and thank you to everyone involved in the Thunderbird project for their efforts, feedback, bug triaging and for these discussions. Cheers.
| Comment hidden (metoo) |
Description
•