[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1)
From: |
Ralph Corderoy |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1) |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:29:02 +0100 |
Hi Ken,
> mhbuild will still handle #forw directives in case someone wants to
> have exact control over their message content.
o/
> 4) After 1.7 comes out, Jon Steinhart will send a message to
> nmh-workers asking why forw doesn't work anymore :-) (I'm sorry, I
> couldn't resist).
After 1.9.
> Thoughts? I realize this is a significant behavior change
+1. The `Forward' header is grabbing another one for nmh's use, in
addition to the existing `Attach'. Should we be using `Nmh-Forward' if
the user isn't likely to have the hassle of typing them most of the
time?
--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
- [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ken Hornstein, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1),
Ralph Corderoy <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ken Hornstein, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Paul Fox, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ralph Corderoy, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Paul Fox, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ralph Corderoy, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ken Hornstein, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Lyndon Nerenberg, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Paul Fox, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Lyndon Nerenberg, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), David Levine, 2016/10/10