Re: [Nmh-workers] Understanding nmh (aka. What's the goal) [ really non-ASCII message bodies ]

[Ken Hornstein]

>> The current behavior was the best idea that I had
>> at the time and nobody has said anything about it until recently.  I don't
>> mind it changing, but I don't want to all of a sudden get complaints from
>> people who were counting on this behavior.
>
>Well, I always considered the current behaviour a bug, but I didn't say
>anything, because the nmh-way of software development seemed pretty 
>inefficient and I didn't want to look at the code myself either.

We have a "way" of software development?  When did that happen? :-)

In all seriousness ... what, exactly, do you mean?  I guess our current
way is, "Anyone who's interested, please contribute!".  I don't see how
that's really much different than other open-source packages.

Also, as long as we're on the subject ... if people want to submit patches
to the list, perhaps formatting them with git format-patch (since, hey,
I went to the whole trouble to convert everything to git) might be
worthwhile.  Or perhaps just doing that when everyone agrees on the
code would make things easier (because the patch could be processed with
git am).

--Ken