Re: [Nmh-workers] message rewrite/fix up

[David Levine]

Harald wrote:

> I like this scheme for the ease to find the original to any given
> message. The downside seems to be, that originals aren't easily
> accessible from nmh tools like pick.

Backup (,) message files aren't, either, and I view
the originals as similar in that respect.  With the Message-ID
files, the original can be found with an easy grep.

> > To put a transformed message into a different folder, I'd use
> > -outfile - | rcvstore +folder.
> 
> That's a lot to type for what would be my most common usage, but
> trivial to customize, so I think it is nice anyway.

I'll think about this some more.

> > > I'm also undecided on whether "preferred form" includes
> > > headers to properly mark the message as 8bit as if it was
> > > actually sent that way.
> > 
> > I hadn't thought about keeping the old C-T-E header when
> > decoding base64 or Q-P, but I suppose it could.  At this point,
> > I don't see the value in that, as noted in my message earlier
> > today about Valdis's observation.
> 
> My reasoning was along the line of "what would happen if I packf
> a bunch of messages in preferred form and open the resulting
> mbox in some external program". I don't know.

The C-T-E header must always match the actual content, so
mhfixmsg adjusts it as necessary.  Messages can still be
handled by external programs (and nmh programs, of course).

Maybe I misunderstood your original comment about properly
marking the message as it was actually sent.  I'm not aware
of any standard header mechanism to indicate a prior
encoding.  (And we only have what we received; we don't know
how the message was originally sent, but I don't think
that's the concern here.)

David