Feedback on ticket 146 - $reverse_realname behavior

rear1019 rear1019 at
Tue Jun 11 10:26:47 UTC 2019

On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 13:27:08 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
> On Saturday, 2019-06-08 14:20:49 -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
>> Right now, if a To address is missing the personal (name) part, the From
>> will be filled in with $realname in the reply.
>> The ticket submitter expects that if the To address was missing a name, the
>> reply From address should be the exact same: missing a name too.
>> I think it's a reasonable expectation, but would like to confirm that
>> opinion with others before I merge the patch.
> Problem is that both can be expected behaviour.
> 1) the sender didn't know or fill in the real name, but I would like an
>    answer to have it; likely in everyday communication
> 2) the mail was sent to an address that on purpose doesn't have a name
>    assigned, like a role account, it may even be it's read and answered
>    by different persons

The ticket assumes that both $reverse_name and $reverse_realname are
set. In this configuration mutt should reuse the To: header of the
message replied to as-is in the reply’s From: header, even if the name
is empty. This is what the names of the configuration variables and
their documentation imply ([1][2]) and what I personally expect.

Using $realname unconditionally when $reverse_name is set is possible by
unsetting $reverse_realname. This works correctly in my experience,
however, is not what the ticket is about.


More information about the Mutt-dev mailing list