[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach
From: |
Lyndon Nerenberg |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2013 13:03:16 -0800 |
On Dec 12, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote:
>> How about if `#' was configurable and could be multiple characters? And
>> that could further be overridden on a per-message basis by an
>> nmh-header?
>
> Hmm ... that just strikes me as too complicated. I mean, it just feels
> like the wrong thing.
What really needs to happen here is for all the commands to become MIME-aware.
Construction of messages would take place by actually inserting the MIME parts
as per user directive. The display of message content would reflect the
current MIME structure. It's a lot of work, but it's the only sane solution.
And should be deferred to a 2.x release stream.
For the 1.x branch I would prefer to keep Ken locked up in the dungeon fixing
up the MIME encoding issues ;-)
--lyndon
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Paul Fox, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Paul Fox, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Paul Fox, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, Jon Steinhart, 2013/12/15