[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2013 21:21:03 -0500 |
Ken wrote:
> >One question: would it make sense to put the entire mhbuild
> >directive in the Nmh-Attachment header instead of just the
> >path? Users could then edit it as they wish.
>
> I feel the answer is "no". I would like to give users the option to
> add their own Nmh-Attachment headers; if that's just a filename,
> that's reasonable. If it's a mhbuild directive, then it's not.
It depends on priorities: I'd rather be able to customize
an attachment than manually insert a simple Nmh-Attachment
header (I think that's the option you mention). I've never
done that.
Or given that you're fixing the header field name, we could
support both.
David
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, (continued)
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/07
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/11
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/11
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/12
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/12
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach,
David Levine <=
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/13
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/15
Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach, David Levine, 2013/12/15