Re: [Nmh-workers] Should attachment header handling be in send?

[Oliver Kiddle]

Jon Steinhart wrote:

> > The attach command is convenient though. Perhaps if the -attach option
> > is not set in .mh_profile, attach could add an mhbuild directive to the
> > body.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Are you suggesting that if some option
> is not set in the profile, then the whatnow attach command run mhbuild?
> Wouldn't that be the same as running the whatnow mime command?

Currently, the attach command defaults to printing:
  "whatnow: can't attach because no header field name was given."
If a header field name is given it adds the filename to the header. What
I'm suggesting is that the default is to construct an mhbuild directive
- something like `#text/plain; name="foo" <>[] ~/foo' and stick it on
the end of the body of the message draft.

Oliver


This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended 
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential 
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, 
disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended 
recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all 
copies and inform the sender. Thank you.