[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Jon Steinhart
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Should attachment header handling be in send?
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:18:35 -0800

Oliver wrote:
> 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.

Well, I guess that this would work.  I see two issues with it.  First,
there is no "annotate body" function so one would have to be written.
But that's no big deal.  The harder one is what to do about any existing
body content.  Should the code scan it looking for #s and parse them to
determine which ones are mhbuild directives and double the #s for ones
that are not?


reply via email to

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