[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2

From: Bob Carragher
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 14:04:35 -0700

On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:25:30 -0400 Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> sez:

> >I never even knew this was a possibility.  I've always put the
> >filename last.  I'm definitely in favor of limiting it this way.
> >Hopefully nobody has created a script that depends on this level
> >of flexibility.  B-)  (It's highly likely that anyone using a
> >custom postproc wrote it.  Is there some way to warn such users
> >and prevent post(8) from completing, so that they can update
> >their postproc without losing their draft or the draft being
> >incorrectly post(8)-ed?)
> Considering that it has been that way for several decades, and
> literally every caller of post(8) would do that (depending on
> arguments) up to a few days ago ... I do not think that would
> be wise.  I think the best we can do change all of the callers
> to put the filename last and live with that.
> As for the man page ... sigh.  I understand your point, but
> like I told Ralph almost every nmh man page is like that, and
> has been like that forever.

Okay, so ixnay on the warning part.

As for the man pages, true it would be a lot of busywork, but why
not push new users toward specifying the arguments the preferred
way, with a warning at the bottom that the old way is still
supported but that support will disappear in the future?  You've
made major changes before, and recently -- e.g. MIME support.
The man pages this decade, and then the actual code next.  B-)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]