Re: [Nmh-workers] merge spost into post

[Ken Hornstein]

>maybe call the mts values: smtp, bsmtp (alias sendmail, for backwards compat),
>pipe?

I'm fine with merging spost into post.  A couple of comments:

- I'm not so sure about about what to call it either.  It gets kinda confusing
  now that we have two different ways to call sendmail.  I like "pipe" for
  the spost replacement, but I think having "sendmail" would be confusing.
  But I don't like "bsmtp" either (I assume that's "batched SMTP"?  What's
  particularly batched about it?).  But I don't have any better suggestions.
  Maybe "sendmail/smtp" and "sendmail/pipe"?  With just "sendmail" meaning
  "sendmail/smtp"?  To me that's a little clearer.

- It occurs to me that some of these things should be overrideable via
  mh_profile (like the path to sendmail).  Just saying :-)

- It should be made clear in the man pages that in the "pipe" or
  "sendmail/pipe" case that it's impossible to set the envelope-from
  address.

- Are we going to have some notification at runtime for those people who
  put "spost" in their postproc a couple of decades ago for some
  long-forgotten reason? :-)  As far as I can tell that's pretty much the
  case for everyone except Alex.

I was going to say that we should make sure that we create a test for it,
but I know David is the test suite champ :-)

--Ken