Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1)

[Oliver Kiddle]

David Levine wrote:
> "X-" headers are deprecated by RFC 6648.  We could add, say, a Mailer
> header.

User-Agent seems to be the newer replacement for X-Mailer. I don't know
if that's standardised or not other than in HTTP.

I prefer that we don't have Nmh- prefixes on our headers. Apart
from it seeming ugly and unnecessary, the reasoning that went behind
the deprecation of X- applies. If mmh, GNU mailutils mh or perhaps
a GUI that supports MH folders like Claws Mail add the same feature,
they might not want the Nmh- prefix. But some users may want to mix
the clients and have them interoperate.

You see the problem in CSS where you end up having to specify certain
properties multiple times for webkit, firefox, IE and then also
without the prefix for once the feature got standardised.

Regarding the questions that started this thread. I'd like it if #forw
directives could specify attachments within a message. So if part 2 is
an attached file, #forw +inbox 1.2 would mime attach the file. A Forward
or Attach header could also provide a shortcut with a forw option to
add those. forw -mime works but sometimes I want to strip out much of
the message body or include only some attachments.

Oliver