starred/cypht

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht.git synced 2026-04-25 04:56:03 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #384] When we reply to an email we have sent, it proposes our address #324

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00 by kerem · 7 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @adrienmaloba on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/issues/384

When we have sent an email to a correspondent and we want to reply to the same message.
By clicking on REPLY, this suggests us to send a message to the sender, not to the receiver of the sender.
The improvement would be to offer to send an email to the recipient instead of the sender.

Originally created by @adrienmaloba on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/issues/384  When we have sent an email to a correspondent and we want to reply to the same message. By clicking on **REPLY**, this suggests us to send a message to the sender, not to the receiver of the sender. The improvement would be to offer to send an email to the recipient instead of the sender.   ![cypht-](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/28392444/78499929-f2ef9580-7753-11ea-83b9-dabf79f8d647.gif)

kerem

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
enhancement

core

smtp
labels

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020):

I'll second this request with a minor modification - I'd actually expect to have all To: From: Cc: copied ~~with To: and From: swapped~~.

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2020): I'll second this request with a minor modification - I'd actually expect to have all `To:` `From:` `Cc:` copied ~with `To:` and `From:` swapped~.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Apr 12, 2020):

Also, when forwarding a message, the "to" and "cc" are missing.

Open question: should bcc be in the forward? Roundcube doesn't do it. I can think of arguments on both sides. I guess we can see what all the main webmail software and services do...

Current forward message:

----- begin forwarded message -----

From:
Date:
Subject:

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Apr 12, 2020): Also, when forwarding a message, the "to" and "cc" are missing. Open question: should bcc be in the forward? Roundcube doesn't do it. I can think of arguments on both sides. I guess we can see what all the main webmail software and services do... Current forward message: ----- begin forwarded message ----- From: Date: Subject:

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Apr 13, 2020):

Open question: should bcc be in the forward?

Hm, bcc gets separated from the email before sending and because "saving to sent folder" is usually implemented as sending as well, one would think it'll always be empty in the saved email. On the other hand, I had many times the problem I wanted to find out who was in bcc (I use it quite frequently) and couldn't find anything because it won't get saved.

That said I'd strongly prefer if bcc actually got saved alongside with the whole email (and then when replying to it copied to the bcc field without any swapping with to nor from nor cc).

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Apr 13, 2020): >Open question: should bcc be in the forward? Hm, bcc gets separated from the email before sending and because "saving to sent folder" is usually implemented as sending as well, one would think it'll always be empty in the saved email. On the other hand, I had many times the problem I wanted to find out who was in bcc (I use it quite frequently) and couldn't find anything because it won't get saved. That said I'd strongly prefer if bcc actually **got saved** alongside with the whole email (and then when replying to it copied to the `bcc` field without any swapping with `to` nor `from` nor `cc`).

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2022):

@dumblob For reply and reply-to-all, I just tested and it looks good to me. Can you confirm?

As for forward: Maybe we should track in a different issue because there are other concerns.
https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/pull/558
https://gitter.im/cypht-org/community?at=60d49d5b8c12474d8ccde4c3

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2022): @dumblob For reply and reply-to-all, I just tested and it looks good to me. Can you confirm? As for forward: Maybe we should track in a different issue because there are other concerns. https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/pull/558 https://gitter.im/cypht-org/community?at=60d49d5b8c12474d8ccde4c3

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022):

@dumblob For reply and reply-to-all, I just tested and it looks good to me. Can you confirm?

You mean the installation you tested exhibits the behavior I outlined above in https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/issues/384#issuecomment-609446767 ?

As for forward: Maybe we should track in a different issue because there are other concerns. #558 https://gitter.im/cypht-org/community?at=60d49d5b8c12474d8ccde4c3

Yep, that is a tough one. OTOH I would also welcome to have an option of a lossy conversion (but not as a default). The conversion "filter" could even be configurable (or there could just be multiple different conversion filters to choose from to not overengineer Cypht configuration 😉).

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022): > @dumblob For reply and reply-to-all, I just tested and it looks good to me. Can you confirm? You mean the installation you tested exhibits the behavior I outlined above in https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/issues/384#issuecomment-609446767 ? > As for forward: Maybe we should track in a different issue because there are other concerns. #558 https://gitter.im/cypht-org/community?at=60d49d5b8c12474d8ccde4c3 Yep, that is a tough one. OTOH I would also welcome to have an option of a lossy conversion (but **not** as a default). The conversion "filter" could even be configurable (or there could just be multiple different conversion filters to choose from to not overengineer Cypht configuration :wink:).

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022):

Well, I am not sure I understand https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/issues/384#issuecomment-609446767 so maybe I am missing a use case.

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022): Well, I am not sure I understand https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht/issues/384#issuecomment-609446767 so maybe I am missing a use case.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:34:45 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022):

Yeah, the mention of swapping shall not be there - I might have been misled by the screenshot - I apologize for the fuss. To clarify, the following is what I actually expect.

Original (in any folder but sent by me):

From: a@b.c
To: b@c.d, c@d.e
Cc: d@e.f, e@f.g

After I (a@b.c) clicked "reply to all":

From: a@b.c
To: b@c.d, c@d.e
Cc: d@e.f, e@f.g

(i.e. 1:1 copy)

Note, this shall work even if I have multiple email addresses in Cypht - so the check "whether it originates from me or someone else" shall be performed against every email I have configured Cypht to actively use.

@dumblob commented on GitHub (Jul 12, 2022): Yeah, the mention of swapping shall not be there - I might have been misled by the screenshot - I apologize for the fuss. To clarify, the following is what I actually expect. Original (in any folder but **sent by me**): ```email From: a@b.c To: b@c.d, c@d.e Cc: d@e.f, e@f.g ``` After I (`a@b.c`) clicked "reply to all": ```email From: a@b.c To: b@c.d, c@d.e Cc: d@e.f, e@f.g ``` (i.e. 1:1 copy) Note, this shall work even if I have multiple email addresses in Cypht - so the check "whether it originates from me or someone else" shall be performed against every email I have configured Cypht to actively use.