[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1)
From: |
Paul Fox |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1) |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:27:19 -0400 |
ken wrote:
> >> 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?
>
> Sigh. I think when we hashed this out last time, the (rough) consensus
> was that not puttting in a "Nmh-" prefix was fine. Attach had prior
> art (I think mutt used it), and Forward seems to be similarly named.
i vote for presenting the user with a user-friendly component name.
if conflict is an issue, could we make the names of these "special"
headers tuneable via a profile entry?
Nmh-Attach-Component: Attach
Nmh-Forward-Component: Forward
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 45.1 degrees)
- [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Ken Hornstein, 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),
Paul Fox <=
- 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
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), Paul Fox, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1), David Levine, 2016/10/10