[rt-devel] Re: SetEnvelopeTo

[Charlie Brady]

On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, Jesse wrote:

> Cool!
> 
> Perhaps, SetRecipients should take
> 
> %args = ( To => undef,
> 	  Cc => undef,
> 	  Bcc =>undef,
> 	  EnvelopeTo => undef);
> 
> and do the right thing with setting envelope-to to the sum of To,Cc and Bcc.

Why? Setting envelope-to to a union of To, Cc and Bcc is precisely what
any RFC822 compliant MTA does, so why should we duplicate it? OTOH, if we
are managing the envelope-to, then why do we need Bcc, since the MTA will 
delete that header, and ignore the others?

-- 

Charlie Brady
Aurema Pty Ltd
 PO Box 305, Strawberry Hills, NSW 2012, Australia
Email:charlieb at aurema.com, Tel: +61 2 9698 2322, Fax: +61 2 9699 9174
  "I think it would be a good idea." Gandhi, on Western Civilisation.