Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh should be more careful about when it unlinks draft files

[Laura Creighton]

In a message of Mon, 02 Jan 2017 11:10:03 -0500, Ken Hornstein writes:
>>But my real query is about this 'apparently successful send'.  Why wasn't
>>it apparent that the send wasn't successful?  Shouldn't a check of return
>>codes have discovered the problem?
>
>That is checked, and certainly if there is a problem I've always been
>returned to the whatnow prompt.  And I can't find a code path where the
>draft gets deleted by send or repl.  So it's not that I'm doubting what
>you say happened, but it sounds like some time elapsed between when you
>got this error and when you went looking for the draft.  I'm forced to
>conclude that something else came along and deleted or overwrote that
>draft.

There was time for me to go to the kitchen, pour me a drink, come back
and 'ohhh.  What's this on my screen?', so plenty to time for something
to munge things beneath me.  Alas.  I was hoping that a smarter send could
understand that the hassle involved in removing an unwanted draft is minor,
and so cautiuously bump the draft number for subsequent messages so that
there was no chance of reusing the draft number if it ever detected a
problem, or, alternatively making an emergency backup from outside the
draft sequence altogether.  Too hard?

Laura

>--Ken